Fontil, Valy

Background Reductions in blood pressure (BP) control among patients with hypertension were observed early in the COVID‐19 pandemic. The degree to which BP control may have returned to prepandemic levels is unknown. Methods Individuals aged 18 to 85 years with hypertension from 17 health systems participating in the National Patient‐Centered Clinical Research Network were identified using electronic health record data collected as part of routine care. BP control (percentage of patients whose most recent BP measurement was <140/<90 mm Hg) was estimated in a series of 12‐month rolling measurement periods from 2017 through 2022 (January 1, 2017 through December 31, 2017; April 1, 2017 through March 31, 2018; … January 1, 2022 through December 31, 2022). Differences in average BP control between 2022 (January 1, 2022 through December 31, 2022) and 2019 (January 1, 2019 through December 31, 2019) were estimated overall (adjusted for age, sex, and race and ethnicity) and by race and ethnicity (adjusted for age and sex). Results Our sample included 1 193 314 persons with hypertension in 2019 (48.9% aged 65–85 years, 52.9% men, 66.2% non‐Hispanic White) and 1 499 418 individuals in 2022 (50.6% aged 65–85 years, 47.1% men, 62.7% non‐Hispanic White). The weighted average BP control dropped from 65.3% in 2019 to 61.8% in 2020 and then partially recovered to 62.6% in 2022 (adjusted mean difference, −2.6 percentage points [95% CI, −5.0 to −0.2]). Non‐Hispanic Asian individuals experienced the largest temporal drop in BP control, declining from 68.4% in 2019 to 63.9% in 2022. Conclusions BP control was disrupted during the COVID‐19 pandemic and had not fully rebounded to prepandemic levels by the end of 2022. Continued surveillance is needed to determine whether the decline in BP control will persist and will result in future adverse cardiovascular events.

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic resulted in reduced in-person clinic visits and declines in blood pressure (BP) control among patients with hypertension. The purpose of this study was to report on pre- to post-pandemic trends in BP control and related BP metrics through 2022. Methods: We utilized data from 17 US health systems with electronic health record data standardized to the PCORnet ® Common Data Model. Multiple BP control metrics were calculated as a series of quarterly, 12-month rolling measurement periods from 2017 to 2022 (i.e., 1/1/2017-12/31/2017, 4/1/2017-3/31/2018, …, 1/1/2022-12/31/2022). BP control was defined as the percentage of patients with hypertension whose most recent BP measurement at an ambulatory visit was <140/<90 mmHg. Improvement in BP was defined as the percentage of patients with a reduction of 10 mmHg in systolic BP or achievement of systolic BP <140 mmHg during the last 3 months of the measurement period in patients with previously uncontrolled hypertension. Results: In 2022, 1,499,418 persons with hypertension were included (50% 65-85 years old; 47% men; 11% Hispanic, 3% non-Hispanic Asian, 20% non-Hispanic Black, 63% non-Hispanic White). BP control was relatively stable within health systems prior to the COVID-19 pandemic. Worsening of BP control was seen for most health systems in the second quarter of 2020 coinciding with onset of the COVID-19 pandemic (Figure, left panel). The weighted average BP control was 65.3% in 2019, dropped to 61.8% in 2020, and increased to 62.9% in 2021 and 62.6% in 2022. Similar patterns were observed for the improvement in BP metric (Figure, right panel): weighted average 31.4% in 2019, 25.7% in 2020, 29.1% in 2021 and 28.6% in 2022. Conclusion: BP control and improvement in BP decreased substantially during the COVID-19 pandemic. While both metrics improved after 2020, they were still below pre-pandemic levels through 2022. These findings underscore the importance of continued surveillance of BP control and other health impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Abstract Introduction: Participation in a clinical trial offers the promise for high-quality medical care for patients with cancer, particularly glioma; however, disparities exist in the accrual of underserved patient populations, including minority patients. A multi-pronged approach for increasing the accrual of underrepresented patients to meet NIH-defined benchmarks includes optimizing patient trial education and counseling. This study seeks to assess the perceptions of the trial counseling process and barriers to trial enrollment among a diverse population of patients with low-and high-grade glioma. Methods: Adult glioma patients who received care from the UCSF Brain Tumor Center from 2020 to 2022 participated in supervised interviews and completed a validated survey, Service Evaluation of Patient Experience of Clinical Trials and Factors Influencing Clinical Trial Entry (SPECIFIC). Thematic analysis, descriptive statistics, and Chi-square tests were used for analysis. Results: One hundred and thirty-six patients completed the SPECIFC questionnaire. There were 44 trial participants (TPs), and 92 non-trial participants (NTPs). Compared to NTPs, TPs were on average 49.8 years old (NTPs 54.6, p=.11) and white (86.3% v. 70%, p=.009). Four core themes emerged from patient perspectives, either as facilitators or barriers to clinical trial participation: 1) Cancer Awareness/Knowledge of Scientific Research 2) Flexible Lifestyle/Affordability 3) Consistency with Values/Faith/Belief System 4) Existing Family/Community Support. Both TPs and NTPs overwhelmingly agreed that clinical trials help improve treatments for cancer. However, compared to 100% of TPs, only 57% of NTPs believed trials offered the best treatment available (p=.001). TPs were more likely to be referred to our institution specifically to enroll in a trial (p=.003), have done prior research on specific experimental treatments (p=.002), have had more than two appointments with the neurosurgeon/neuro-oncologist, and report receiving the most counseling directly from an MD level provider (p=.01). When evaluating the trial counseling process, 93% of TPs reported willingness to consent the same day, but 5% endorsed feeling pressure to participate. TPs were satisfied with the quality of the patient information sheet, with 88% rating the information sheet as good or excellent and 88% reporting that the information sheet was easy to understand. While 14% of TPs believed the information sheet was too long, 27% and 41% desired more information about the trial therapeutic and participation requirements, respectively. Conclusion: Overwhelmingly, trial participants were confident in the information they received and were willing to begin clinical trial enrollment on the same day of receiving information. Interventions to improve the quality and equitable delivery of patient trial education must be paired with other validated multi-dimensional strategies to reach target accrual benchmarks of underserved patient populations to therapeutic clinical trials. Citation Format: Mulki Mehari, Sheantel Reihl, Ramin Morshed, Jasleen Kaur, Mikias Negussie, Ugomma Chukwueke, Alyx Porter, Valy Fontil, Shawn Hervey-Jumper. Engagement and experience with clinical trial counseling in adult glioma patients: A single institution, mixed-methods study [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 16th AACR Conference on the Science of Cancer Health Disparities in Racial/Ethnic Minorities and the Medically Underserved; 2023 Sep 29-Oct 2;Orlando, FL. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2023;32(12 Suppl):Abstract nr A080.

Background Uncontrolled blood pressure (BP) remains a leading cause of death in the United States. The American Medical Association developed a quality improvement program to improve BP control, but it is unclear how to efficiently implement this program at scale across multiple health systems. Methods and Results We conducted BP MAP (Blood Pressure Measure Accurately, Act Rapidly, and Partner With Patients), a comparative effectiveness trial with clinic‐level randomization to compare 2 scalable versions of the quality improvement program: Full Support (with support from quality improvement expert) and Self‐Guided (using only online materials). Outcomes were clinic‐level BP control (<140/90 mm Hg) and other BP‐related process metrics calculated using electronic health record data. Difference‐in‐differences were used to compare changes in outcomes from baseline to 6 months, between intervention arms, and to a nonrandomized Usual Care arm composed of 18 health systems. A total of 24 safety‐net clinics in 9 different health systems underwent randomization and then simultaneous implementation. BP control increased from 56.7% to 59.1% in the Full Support arm, and 62.0% to 63.1% in the Self‐Guided arm, whereas BP control dropped slightly from 61.3% to 60.9% in the Usual Care arm. The between‐group differences‐in‐differences were not statistically significant (Full Support versus Self‐Guided=+1.2% [95% CI, −3.2% to 5.6%], P =0.59; Full Support versus Usual Care=+3.2% [−0.5% to 6.9%], P =0.09; Self‐Guided versus Usual Care=+2.0% [−0.4% to 4.5%], P =0.10). Conclusions In this randomized trial, 2 methods of implementing a quality improvement intervention in 24 safety net clinics led to modest improvements in BP control that were not statistically significant. Registration URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov ; Unique identifier: NCT03818659.

ImportanceSelf-measured blood pressure (SMBP) with commercially available connected smartphone applications may help patients effectively use SMBP measurements.ObjectiveTo determine if enhanced SMBP paired with a connected smartphone application was superior to standard SMBP for blood pressure (BP) reduction or patient satisfaction.Design, Setting, and ParticipantsThis randomized clinical trial was conducted among 23 health systems participating in PCORnet, the National Patient-Centered Clinical Research Network, and included patients who reported having uncontrolled BP at their last clinic visit, a desire to lower their BP, and a smartphone. Enrollment and randomization occurred from August 3, 2019, to December 31, 2020, which was followed by 6 months of follow-up for each patient. Analysis commenced shortly thereafter.InterventionsEligible participants were randomly assigned to enhanced SMBP using a device that paired with a connected smartphone application (enhanced) or a standard device (standard). Participants received their device in the mail, along with web-based educational materials and phone-based support as needed. No clinician engagement was undertaken, and the study provided no special mechanisms for delivering measurements to clinicians for use in BP management.Main Outcomes and MeasuresReduction in systolic BP, defined as the difference between clinic BP at baseline and the most recent clinic BP extracted from electronic health records at 6 months.ResultsEnrolled participants (1051 enhanced [50.0%] vs 1050 standard [50.0%]; 1191 women [56.7%]) were mostly middle-aged or older (mean [SD] age, 58 [13] years), nearly a third were Black or Hispanic (645 [31%]), and most were relatively comfortable using technology (mean [SD], 4.1 [1.1] of 5). The mean (SD) change in systolic BP from baseline to 6 months was −10.8 (18) mm Hg vs −10.6 (18) mm Hg (enhanced vs standard: adjusted difference, −0.19 mm Hg; 95% CI, −1.83 to 1.44;P = .81). Secondary outcomes were mostly null, except for documented attainment of BP control to lower than 140/&amp;lt;90 mm Hg, which occurred in 32% enhanced vs 29% standard groups (odds ratio, 1.15; 95% CI, 1.01-1.34). Most participants were very likely to recommend their SMBP device to a friend (70% vs 69%).Conclusions and RelevanceThis randomized clinical trial found that enhanced SMBP paired with a smartphone application is not superior to standard SMBP for BP reduction or patient satisfaction.Trial RegistrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier:NCT03796689

Abstract Background The NIH Revitalization Act, implemented 29 years ago, set to improve the representation of women and minorities in clinical trials. In this study, we investigate progress made in all phase therapeutic clinical trials for neuroepithelial CNS tumors stratified by demographic-specific age-adjusted disease incidence and mortality. Additionally, we identify workforce characteristics associated with clinical trials meeting established accrual benchmarks. Methods Registry study of published clinical trials for World Health Organization defined neuroepithelial CNS tumors between January 2000 and December 2019. Study participants were obtained from PubMed and ClinicalTrials.gov. Population-based data originated from the CBTRUS for incidence analyses. SEER-18 Incidence-Based Mortality data was used for mortality analysis. Descriptive statistics, Fisher exact, and χ 2 tests were used for data analysis. Results Among 662 published clinical trials representing 49 907 participants, 62.5% of participants were men and 37.5% women (P &lt; .0001) representing a mortality specific over-accrual for men (P = .001). Whites, Asians, Blacks, and Hispanics represented 91.7%, 1.5%, 2.6%, and 1.7% of trial participants. Compared with mortality, Blacks (47% of expected mortality, P = .008), Hispanics (17% of expected mortality, P &lt; .001) and Asians (33% of expected mortality, P &lt; .001) were underrepresented compared with Whites (114% of expected mortality, P &lt; .001). Clinical trials meeting accrual benchmarks for race included minority authorship. Conclusions Following the Revitalization Act, minorities and women remain underrepresented in therapeutic clinical trials for neuroepithelial tumors, relative to disease incidence and mortality. Study accrual has improved with time. This study provides a framework for clinical trial accrual efforts and offers guidance regarding workforce considerations associated with enrollment of underserved patients.

Abstract INTRODUCTION The NIH Revitalization Act, implemented 29 years ago, set to improve the representation of women and minorities in clinical trials. In this study, we investigate the progress made in neuro-oncology in all phase therapeutic clinical trials for neuro-epithelial central nervous system tumors in comparison to their demographic-specific age-adjusted disease incidence and mortality. METHODS Registry study of all published clinical trials for World Health Organization (WHO) defined neuro-epithelial CNS tumors between January 2000 and December 2019. Study participants for trials were obtained from PubMed and ClinicalTrials.gov. Population-based data from the CBTRUS for incidence analyses. SEER-18 Incidence-Based Mortality data was used for mortality analysis. Descriptive statistics, Fisher exact, and c2 tests were used to analyze the data. RESULTS Among 662 published clinical trial articles representing 49, 907 accrued participants, 62.5% of study participants were men and 37.5% were women (P&lt; 0.0001) representing a mortality specific over-accrual for men (P= 0.001) and under-accrual for women (P= 0.001). Whites, Asians, Blacks, and Hispanics represented 91.7%, 1.5%, 2.6%, and 1.7% of trial participants. Compared with their US cancer mortality, Blacks (47% of expected mortality, P=.008), Hispanics (17% of expected mortality, P&lt; .001) and Asians (33% of expected mortality, P&lt; .001) were underrepresented compared with Whites (114% of expected mortality, P&lt; .001). CONCLUSIONS Nearly 30 years since the Revitalization Act, minorities and women are consistently underrepresented when compared with their demographic-specific incidence and mortality in therapeutic clinical trials for neuroepithelial tumors. This study provides a framework for investigating cancer clinical trial accrual and offers guidance regarding workforce factors associated with enrollment of vulnerable patients.

Background: Uncontrolled blood pressure (BP) is a leading preventable cause of death that remains common in the US population despite the availability of effective medications. New technology and program innovation has high potential to improve BP but may be expensive and burdensome for patients, clinicians, health systems, and payers and may not produce desired results or reduce existing disparities in BP control. Methods and Results: The PCORnet Blood Pressure Control Laboratory is a platform designed to enable national surveillance and facilitate quality improvement and comparative effectiveness research. The platform uses PCORnet, the National Patient-Centered Clinical Research Network, for engagement of health systems and collection of electronic health record data, and the Eureka Research Platform for eConsent and collection of patient-reported outcomes and mHealth data from wearable devices and smartphones. Three demonstration projects are underway: BP track will conduct national surveillance of BP control and related clinical processes by measuring theory-derived pragmatic BP control metrics using electronic health record data, with a focus on tracking disparities over time; BP MAP will conduct a cluster-randomized trial comparing effectiveness of 2 versions of a BP control quality improvement program; BP Home will conduct an individual patient-level randomized trial comparing effectiveness of smartphone-linked versus standard home BP monitoring. Thus far, BP Track has collected electronic health record data from over 826 000 eligible patients with hypertension who completed ≈3.1 million ambulatory visits. Preliminary results demonstrate substantial room for improvement in BP control (<140/90 mm Hg), which was 58% overall, and in the clinical processes relevant for BP control. For example, only 12% of patients with hypertension with a high BP measurement during an ambulatory visit received an order for a new antihypertensive medication. Conclusions: The PCORnet Blood Pressure Control Laboratory is designed to be a reusable platform for efficient surveillance and comparative effectiveness research; results from demonstration projects are forthcoming.

Background: The Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute (PCORI) funded National Blood Pressure Surveillance System (BP Track) is a new national system that generates quarterly metrics of blood pressure (BP) control and BP-related quality metrics for participating healthcare systems from electronic health record (EHR) data. Methods: Queries against standardized EHR data in the national Patient-Centered Clinical Research Network (PCORnet) Common Data Model format produce a set of quality metrics relevant to improving BP control, including Controlling High BP (NQF 0018) and Improvement in BP (CMS65v7), and eight process measures specific to clinical management and treatment practices for improving BP control ( Table ). The metrics, aggregated overall and by health system are reported back to health systems via user-friendly Tableau dashboards, and allow for observation of metric trends. Results: To date, 19 datamarts have contributed EHR data from 1,177,232 patients who met the eligibility criteria for the BP Control measure and 4,454,729 encounters that included a BP measurement during the measurement period. Average age was 62 years; 10% were young adults (<45 years), 17% were African American, 52% female, 28% had diabetes, 15% had coronary heart disease, and 14% had depression. Results demonstrate substantial opportunity for improvement in overall BP control (60% with BP<140/<90 mmHg, range: 42-72%), and many healthcare processes, including medication intensification (12%, 0.6-22%) and use of fixed dose combination medications (24%, 0-88%, Table ). Conclusion: Major opportunities exist for improving BP control, especially in improving the frequency and quality of BP medication prescribing for patients with high BP. The BP Track National BP Surveillance System will track these metrics, by demographic subgroup and over time, and will generate data that can guide and focus quality improvement initiatives aimed at effective BP management.

Background: New technology and healthcare delivery approaches may help improve blood pressure (BP) control. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) can demonstrate effectiveness of these emerging approaches, both overall and especially within underserved populations, but RCTs are expensive. Our objective is to establish a national platform to support BP control surveillance and efficient RCTs. Methods: The PCORnet BP Control Laboratory, designed and launched in partnership with the American Heart Association (AHA) and the American Medical Association (AMA), leverages electronic health record (EHR) systems throughout the US, the National Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Network (PCORnet), and the NIH-funded Eureka Research Platform, which enables direct-to-participant research including collection of patient-reported outcomes and mHealth data from wearable devices and smartphones. We will use these resources to 1) Conduct national surveillance through quarterly EHR data queries to calculate and track institution- and clinic-level BP control metrics across 23 PCORnet institutions, overall and within key subgroups, and support participation in the AHA/AMA’s Target:BP recognition program (BP Track); 2) Compare effectiveness of a Full Support versus Self-Guided version of the AMA’s Measure Accurately, Act Rapidly, and Partner with Patients (MAP) program at improving BP control in a cluster randomized trial of 24 safety net clinics (BP MAP); and 3) Compare effectiveness of Smartphone-linked versus standard home BP monitoring at reducing systolic BP in an individual-level, direct-to-participant RCT of 2000 patients with uncontrolled BP (BP Home). Results: Preliminary BP Track queries demonstrate an overall BP control rate of 56%, lower control in Black patients (51%), substantial heterogeneity in clinic-level metrics (e.g., 33% vs. 64% BP control), and low rates of medication intensification (9% prescribed a new medication class when BP was high). BP Track will launch PCORnet-wide queries in June; BP MAP in May; and BP Home in August 2019. Conclusions: Feasibility testing is underway to determine if the PCORnet BP Control Laboratory will be useful for investigators interested in conducting efficient RCTs of BP control interventions.