Kaur, Judith S.

Abstract Background: The Alaska Tribal Health System is working to increase colorectal cancer (CRC) screening among Alaska Native peoples. It is unknown why people who initially agree to screening might not follow through to complete their screening. Methods: As part of a larger intervention investigating multi-target stool DNA (mt-sDNA) test use in rural Alaska communities, we interviewed Alaska Native people who had agreed to scheduling a colonoscopy or having a mt-sDNA kit sent to their home but who did not complete their selected test. Results: Of 531 Alaska Native people who initially agreed but did not complete screening, 299 (56%) were able to be contacted for a follow-up survey. Of those, 256 (86%) answered the survey; 187/224 (83%) who had chosen mt-sDNA, and 69/75 (93%) who had chosen colonoscopy. Reported reasons for non-completion of stool DNA test kits included being busy or forgetting, being uncomfortable doing a stool test, and not knowing how to do the test or concerns over how to return the kit for processing. Reasons for non-completion of colonoscopy included scheduling issues, physical health issues, travel, and housing barriers, as well as cost, fear, and being too busy. Of note, many respondents in both groups indicated they would still be interested in CRC screening in the future or were currently pursuing screening. Conclusions: This was the first exploration of reasons for non-adherence to CRC screening after initial test request by Alaska Native people. Many of the identified themes are amenable to health care system changes for future interventions to improve screening outreach and uptake. Citation Format: Diana Redwood, Christie A. Flanagan, Lauren Jeffries, Melissa Toffolon, Joseph Klejka, Lila J. Finney Rutten, Judith S. Kaur, John B. Kisiel. Non-completion of colorectal cancer screening among Alaska Native people in an intervention trial [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2026; Part 1 (Regular Abstracts); 2026 Apr 17-22; San Diego, CA. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2026;86(7 Suppl):Abstract nr 2474.

The Alaska Tribal Health System is working to increase colorectal cancer (CRC) screening among Alaska Native people, who experience the highest CRC rates in the world. This study examined CRC screening provider- and system-level barriers and facilitators from the perspective of healthcare providers serving Alaska Native people in rural/remote communities. A total of 28 provider (physicians, advanced practice, and Community Health Aides/Practitioners) interviews were held from 1 February to 30 November 2021. Colonoscopy provider-level barrier themes included time, competing priorities, and staffing, while system-level barriers included travel costs, weather, and the COVID-19 pandemic. Multi-target stool DNA (mt-sDNA) barrier themes included test viability and unfamiliarity, and previous stool tests experiences. For both tests, limited medical record reminders was a major barrier. Facilitator themes for both tests included community outreach, cultural competency and patient navigation, and clinic/system improvements. In-depth interviews with tribal health providers showed that adding mt-sDNA testing may help address system-level colonoscopy barriers such as waitlists and travel costs, but other barriers remain. Further research is needed into patient barriers and facilitators, as well as the effectiveness of integrating mt-sDNA into a geographically dispersed tribal health system to reduce cancer disparities and build equity in CRC prevention among Alaska Native people.

6509 Background: Accrual of underrepresented populations (URPs-racial and ethnic minorities, women, rural populations, and younger and older populations) to clinical trials has been historically low, hampering progress in cancer treatment, symptom intervention and prevention for all. In 2018, the Alliance for Clinical Trials in Oncology (Alliance), as a part of the NCI's National Clinical Trials Network (NCTN) and a Research Base for the NCI Community Oncology Research Program (NCORP) began a multi-pronged strategy to increase accrual of underrepresented minorities by race and ethnicity (URMs) to both treatment and cancer control trials conducted by the Alliance. Methods: Alliance leadership set a goal of 20% accrual for racial and ethnic minorities to all trials in 2018. The Health Disparities Committee (HDC) implemented several strategies over time including leadership promotion/expectation of goals; funding junior investigators and special projects focusing on URPs; working groups for specific populations in HDC; HDC co-chairs to selected protocols; translation services of patient facing materials; opening studies at NCORP Minority Underserved Sites; real time monitoring of accrual demographics, by Alliance and by site; protocols addressing aims for specific populations; closing protocol enrollment to majority populations; and increasing the study sample size to enroll additional minority participants to allow for analyzing intervention effects by subgroups. Results: Accrual data from 117 NCTN and NCORP trials led by Alliance was included from 2014-2022. Over time, accrual of racial and ethnic minorities increased from 13.6% to 25.3% for treatment and 13% to 21.5% for cancer control trials. This results in overall increase from 13.5 % to 23.6% of URMs for all trials, a 74.8% improvement. Conclusions: Intentional approaches to increase URMs has led to an increase in URM accruals to Alliance trials. Future strategies include implementation of the Alliance Patient Questionnaire to prospectively measure the prevalence of specific social determinants of health among patients enrolled to further expand the understanding and address the needs of unique population accrued to Alliance trials. In addition, accrual of women, rural populations, and younger and older adults (65+ years) are now being monitored over time to increase all URP accruals.

Background: Thirty-six states, including Florida, have legalized marijuana for medical and/or recreational use, yet how it is used and perceived by persons with cancer is not well understood. Objectives: The purpose of this study was to identify patterns of use, perceived benefits, and side effects of medical marijuana (MMJ) among cancer patients in Florida. Methods: For this descriptive, cross-sectional study, anyone residing within the state of Florida who was diagnosed or treated for a malignancy within the last five years and had used MMJ was eligible. An online survey containing questions about dosing, side effects, perceived benefits, and barriers to use was used. Descriptive statistics including frequencies, percentages, means, and standard deviations were used to analyze quantitative data. Responses to open-ended questions were coded and categorized. Results: Sleep ( n = 112), pain ( n = 96), and anxiety ( n = 82) were the most common symptoms participants used MMJ to relieve and overall felt it was highly effective. MMJ was well tolerated with a minority (10.3%) reporting any adverse effects. Cost was the most frequent barrier reported by participants (42.8%). A variety of legal, bureaucratic, and system-related barriers were described. Conclusion: Participants perceived MMJ to be helpful in alleviating cancer symptoms. They held negative perceptions of the way MMJ is implemented and integrated into their oncology treatment plan. Enhanced communication and patient/provider education on MMJ are needed to inform patient decision making.

BackgroundDecision aids (DAs) can improve knowledge for prostate cancer treatment. However, the relative effects of DAs delivered within the clinical encounter and in more diverse patient populations are unknown. A multicenter cluster randomized controlled trial with a 2×2 factorial design was performed to test the effectiveness of within‐visit and previsit DAs for localized prostate cancer, and minority men were oversampled.MethodsThe interventions were delivered in urology practices affiliated with the NCI Community Oncology Research Program Alliance Research Base. The primary outcome was prostate cancer knowledge (percent correct on a 12‐item measure) assessed immediately after a urology consultation.ResultsFour sites administered the previsit DA (39 patients), 4 sites administered the within‐visit DA (44 patients), 3 sites administered both previsit and within‐visit DAs (25 patients), and 4 sites provided usual care (50 patients). The median percent correct in prostate cancer knowledge, based on the postvisit knowledge assessment after the intervention delivery, was as follows: 75% for the pre+within‐visit DA study arm, 67% for the previsit DA only arm, 58% for the within‐visit DA only arm, and 58% for the usual‐care arm. Neither the previsit DA nor the within‐visit DA had a significant impact on patient knowledge of prostate cancer treatments at the prespecified 2.5% significance level (P = .132 and P = .977, respectively).ConclusionsDAs for localized prostate cancer treatment provided at 2 different points in the care continuum in a trial that oversampled minority men did not confer measurable gains in prostate cancer knowledge.

151 Background: Decision aids (DAs) for prostate cancer treatment can improve knowledge and reduce decisional conflict, but the relative effect of pre-visit and within-visit DAs is not known, and effect sizes for minority populations has not been estimated. Methods: We conducted a 3-arm, patient-level-RCT in specialty urology and radiation oncology practices in Ohio, South Dakota, and Alaska, test the effect of pre-consultation and with-in consultation decision aids on patient knowledge immediately after specialty consultation compared to usual care. We used linear regression to estimate effects of each intervention arm, including the respective standard error, two-sided 95% confidence interval, and two-sided P value for testing the study’s hypotheses. Results: 103 patients were recruited and randomized to receive either the pre-visit decision aid, within-visit decision aid, or neither decision aids (usual care). In 2017 and 20018, we accrued similar numbers of men to pre-consultation aid (n = 37), during-consultation aid (n = 33) and usual care arms, respectively (n = 33). The median (range) age in years was 64 [49, 81]; 67.6% were White, 15.7% were Black or African American, 16.7% were American Indian or Alaska Native, and 1% were not reported. 47.6%, 45.6%, and 6.8% had a baseline clinical stage of T1, T2, and T3, respectively. The median [range] prostate specific antigen (PSA) was 8.0 [2.4, 53.7]. There were no clinically notable imbalances. We obtained usable data on 102 of the 103 patient-participants. The pre-visit decision aid arm showed a mean knowledge effect of 0.694 (0.636, 0.753). The within-visit decision arm showed a very similar mean knowledge effect of 0.686 (0.625, 0.748). The usual care arm showed a mean knowledge effect of 0.644 (0.582,0.705). The linear regression model showed, that, compared with usual care, neither intervention effect achieved statistical significance in the primary analysis (p = 0.24, 0.330, for pre-visit and within-visit, respectively). Conclusions: Modest knowledge gains of pre-visit and during-visit decision aids for prostate cancer treatment were not statistically significant. Clinical trial information: NCT03182998 .

9592 Background: Palliative care (PC) is an essential part of the continuum of care for cancer (CA) patients (pts). Little is known about the aggregate characteristics and survival of pts receiving inpatient palliative care consultation (PCC). Methods: We reviewed data prospectively collected on patients seen by the Palliative Care Inpatient Consult Service at Mayo Clinic - Rochester from 2003–2008. Demographics, consult characteristics, and survival were analyzed. Kaplan-Meier survival curves and a Cox model of survival were produced. Results: 1794 total patients were seen over the five year period. Cancer is the most common primary diagnosis (47%). Growth in annual PCC has risen dramatically (113 in 2003 vs. 414 in 2007) despite stable total hospital admissions. Patient are predominantly men (52% vs. 48%, p=0.02); median age is 76. General medicine, medical cardiology, and medical intensive care unit services refer most often. Most frequent issues addressed are goals of care, dismissal planning, and pain control (29%, 19%, 17%). PCC in actively dying pts have increased with 27% of all non-operating room, non-trauma in-hospital deaths being seen. Although CA pts have the highest median survival after PCC vs. other diagnoses (17 days, p = 0.018), we observed a five-year trend of decreasing survival from admission to death and PCC to death. Median time from admission to death in CA pts is 36 days in 2003 and 19 days in 2008 (p<0.01). Median time from PCC to death is 33 versus 11.5 days (p<0.01). Despite this, median hospital length of stay and time from PCC to discharge have remained fixed at 8 and 2.5 days, respectively. A Cox model of survival to discharge and <6 months survival (hospice eligibility) shows hospital length of stay, time from consult to discharge, and dismissal location from hospital are all prognostic factors. Conclusions: Survival window for PC intervention for CA pts is lessening. With the trend of shorter survival after PCC, PC professionals have little over two days to implement a comprehensive, ongoing care plan. This highlights the importance of earlier outpatient palliative care involvement with advanced cancer patients and families. No significant financial relationships to disclose.

e20013 Background: Recent evidence suggests that patients with advanced cancer exhibit an underlying anti-tumor immune response that is continuously attenuated by regulatory T cells (Treg). Depletion of Treg using conventional chemotherapy may be feasible and clinically beneficial. C-reactive protein (CRP) is reported to rise/fall with initiation/termination of the immune response, and may be a surrogate for the periodicity of Treg proliferation that could be utilized for timing of anti-proliferative therapy. Timed delivery of chemotherapy therapy based on CRP cycling may deplete Treg and yield clinical benefit. Methods: We conducted a pilot clinical for 12 patients with metastatic melanoma who underwent serial CRP measurements (every 2–3 days) for 2 weeks. The CRP oscillation cycle was identified and chemotherapy with temozolomide (200mg/m2 for 5 days, every 28 days) was initiated at the estimated peak of plasma CRP. Patients were evaluated for clinical and immune response endpoints every 8 weeks until progression. Results: All 12 patients (median age 61; 4 female; 7 with M1c disease) exhibited oscillating CRP levels with an average periodicity of 7.8 days. Only 11 patients were treated (1 patient had rapid tumor progression). The two patients who remain progression-free for >2 years (1 PR, 1 CR), were treated in the pre-peak section of the CRP cycle, distinctly separate from the other patients treated post CRP-peak (all progressed <5 months). Presented are peripheral blood immunological laboratory correlates (cellular and cytokine) to CRP oscillation. Conclusions: These data suggest that patient clinical outcome may be dependent on the timing of therapy relative to an individual patient's immune response cycle and outline the dynamic equilibrium of systemic immune homeostasis in patients with advanced melanoma. Further investigations of these observations are under way. [Table: see text]

e24176 Background: Decision aids for prostate cancer treatment can improve knowledge, but the relative effect of pre-consultation and within-consultation DAs is not known. Methods: We conducted a parallel design, 2-by-2 factorial, 4-arm, cluster-RCT in urology practices affiliated with the NCI’s Alliance research base. We compared patient knowledge immediately after consultation (%12-item% correct) intervention arms compared to usual care. We used mixed effects regression modeling to assess effect of interventions on knowledge adjusting for site-clustering, race/ethnicity (non-Hispanic White; Other), age (years), clinical stage (T1-3), PSA, and Gleason score. Results: 15 of 21 randomized centers accrued 158 pts from Nov 2017 to June 2019. The arm delivering both DAs (n = 3 sites) recruited 25 pts. The pre-consultation DA arm (n = 4 sites) recruited 39 pts. The within-consultation DA arm (n = 4 sites) recruited 44 pts. The no DA arm (n = 4 sites) accrued 50 pts. Overall, mean age was 64; 54% were AA; 73% had T1 stage; median Gleason = 7; and median PSA = 7. The combined DAs group, followed by pre-consultation reported higher median knowledge (75% and 67%, respectively). The within-consultation and no DA arms both reported median knowledge scores (58%). Within arm, inter-site standard deviations in mean knowledge scores ranged from 0.164 in in the pre-consultation arm to 0.232 in the usual care arm. Neither pre-consultation nor within-consultation DAs had statistically significant effects (p = .15 and p = .99, respectively). Pre-specified adjusted difference [97.5% CIs], comparing the pre-consultation DA and the within-consultation DA with the control was 9.4% [-7.3%, 26.2%] and -0.4% [-16.9%, 16.1%], respectively. Intra-cluster correlation (ICC) coefficient was high (.24). No interaction effects were identified (p = .98). A post-hoc analysis comparing any DA vs usual care found a mean adjusted difference [95% CI] of 5.6% [-8.5%, 19.8%] (p = 0.40), 63.9% for any DA and 58.3% for usual care. Conclusions: Possible knowledge gains associated with some DAs for early prostate cancer were obscured by larger-than-expected intra-cluster correlation effects associated with the primary outcome. How interventions were used was not measured. Support:UG1CA189823; https://acknowledgments.alliancefound.org ; R01 MD008934-06. Clinical trial information: NCT03103321 .

8527 Background: Minority patients (MP) suffer deficits in access to care and socioeconomic status. This study uses a patient-level pooled analysis to explore whether these deficits translate into quality of life (QOL) differences between MP and non-MP on clinical trials. Method: Baseline QOL scores were combined from 47 clinical trials (6,513 patients) conducted either at the Mayo Clinic Cancer Center or in the North Central Cancer Treatment Group. QOL scales used were the Uniscale, Linear Analogue Self Assessment (LASA), Symptom Distress Scale (SDS), Profile of Mood States (POMS) and Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - General (Fact-G). Fisher’s Exact tests and linear regression adjusted for age, site, and performance score. Survival data was compared using the method of Kaplan-Meier. Results: Eight percent (531) of patients self-reported as MP (0.45% American Indian/Alaskan Native, 0.7% Asian, 5% Black/African American, 1.5% Hispanic, 0.1% Native Hawaiian and 0.3% Other). MP had no meaningful deficits in overall QOL or the SDS and were slightly worse on FACT-G total score, physical, social/family, functional, and SDS nausea severity. MP among lung cancer patients reported greater nausea (58 vs 69) and sleep problems (34 vs 54), with neurological cancers reported worse emotional well-being (53 vs 74), and with GI tumors had lower social/family well-being (60 vs 67). Regression models confirmed these results. Median survival time was shorter for MP (198 vs 310 days, p=0.001) but was not significant after adjusting for disease severity. Conclusions: MP on these clinical trials did not report large QOL deficits at baseline relative to non-MP. MP did indicate small deficits in physical, social, and emotional subscales. MP experienced large tumor-specific deficits for a few QOL domains that might bear further attention. [Table: see text] No significant financial relationships to disclose.