Ridgeway, Jennifer L.

11118 Background: Lung cancer survivors experience more physical and mental challenges, heavier symptom burden, and poorer quality of life than survivors of other cancers. Many symptoms persist or worsen for survivors beyond 5 years of cancer diagnosis, referred as long-term lung cancer survivors (LTLCS). Social determinants of health (SDoH) factors negatively impact patient reported outcomes (PROs) among cancer survivors, but their role in outcomes is under reported in lung cancer survivors and unknown in LTLCS. We investigated the impact of SDoH on PROs in a 20-year prospective lung cancer cohort. Methods: Our cohort includes 19,251 lung cancer patients (cases) diagnosed from 1997 through 2016 and followed up to 27 years, of whom 4799 (25%) became LTLCS. SDoH information was obtained by a lung cancer study PRO questionnaire or an institution SDoH questionnaire. Analyzed in this report are 2982 cases and 480 controls who had a low-dose chest CT scan and were ruled out for cancer, all answered at least one PRO questionnaire (first response); and 1366 LTLCS answered 5 years after diagnosis (long-term response). Along with fatigue and dyspnea, 5 SDoH variables, i.e., financial concerns, legal concerns, family and friends support, spiritual well-being, and social activity were scored on a 0 (worst) - 10 (best) scale and dichotomized as 0-5 (deficit/worse/lower) or 6-10 (no deficit/better/higher). We also assessed employment and health-related work experience. A difference of 1.0 unit or more in score was considered clinically meaningful along with a 2-sided test P-value less than 0.05; Chi-square or Fisher’s Exact Test and Kruskal-Wallis test were used accordingly. Results: Compared to controls, cases were younger (mean age: 62 vs. 65 years, P<0.05); more women than men reported worse financial concerns (56% vs. 38%, P<0.01) and lower spiritual well-being (43% vs. 26%, P=0.04) at first response; this sex disparity reduced but remained significant at long-term. Worse dyspnea (4.4-4.8 vs. 5.6) and fatigue (4.7-4.8 vs. 5.8-5.9) were seen in cases with more financial and legal concerns compared to those with fewer concerns (Ps<0.01). Cases with higher family and friends support, spiritual well-being and social activity had less dyspnea (5.7-6.0 vs. 4.2-4.5) and fatigue (5.5-5.9 vs. 3.9-4.4) than those with lower scores (Ps<0.04). Employment and health-related work experience data were provided by 2213 responders: Comparing 1735 cases to 478 controls, a lower proportion of cases was employed (28% vs. 39%), more cases “often felt tired after work” (49% vs. 28%), and more cases had “quite a lot” of difficulty in daily work or could not work at all” (26% vs. 9%, Ps<0.01). Conclusions: We found that in lung cancer survivors, more women than men reported worse financial concerns, and lower SDoH status was correlated with worse dyspnea and fatigue, indicating SDoH-driven interventions are important to improve lung cancer survivors’ PROs.

LBA12006 Background: Symptom burden and functional decline are prevalent, inconsistently treated, and associated with adverse health outcomes in patients with cancer. Symptom monitoring with electronic patient-reported outcome measures (ePROMs) has yielded mixed results due, in part, to care teams’ variable bandwidth and resourcing for symptom management. The collaborative care model (CCM) offers a validated means to address these issues and potentially improve clinical and health services outcomes. Capturing ePROMS through the electronic health record (EHR) for use in CCM delivery provides a potentially scalable approach to manage symptoms at the population level. Methods: E2C2 is a cluster-randomized, population-level, stepped wedge pragmatic trial that compares a bundled, EHR-facilitated, CCM-based intervention to improve control of SPPADE symptoms (Sleep interference, Pain, impaired Physical function, Anxiety, Depression, and Energy deficit/fatigue) with usual care. All patients, regardless of cancer type or stage, treated in the medical oncology clinics of a multi-state health system, were assigned to one of fifteen clusters. Control and intervention conditions monitored SPPADE symptoms with Epic EHR administered 11-point numerical rating scales (NRSs). Moderate and severe symptoms were defined as 4-6/10 and >7/10, respectively. The intervention added EHR clinician decision support; automated delivery of symptom self-management information; and options to address severe symptoms with a dedicated symptom care manager. The primary outcome was post-baseline SPPADE scores assessed using multivariate regression of six cluster-period mean SPPADE symptom scores against E2C2 exposure, fixed cluster and secular time effects. Results: From March 2019 to January 2023, 50,559 patients were assigned to E2C2 clusters and 40,295 completed at least one ePROM. At first assessment, participants’ mean age was 63.3 years; 58% were female; 26% were rural, and the prevalences of moderate or worse symptoms were fatigue 42%, impaired function 34%, sleep disturbance 34%, anxiety 27%, pain 26%, and depression 23%. The intervention significantly reduced mean composite SPPADE symptom scores, p <0.001, among all patients, as well as those with >1 moderate or worse symptom. All mean symptom scores were lower in the intervention group, with the largest effects detected among patients with fatigue -0.2 (-0.4, -0.07), anxiety -0.14 (-0.2, -0.03), and depression -0.1 (-0.2, -0.002). Conclusions: In this large cluster-randomized trial, an EHR-facilitated, bundled intervention that scaled CCM-based surveillance and management of SPPADE symptoms significantly reduced population-level symptom burden, particularly for fatigue, anxiety, and depression. This study provides real world evidence and the foundation for future national efforts aimed at controlling symptoms in patients with cancer. Clinical trial information: NCT03892967 .

11108 Background: Advances in cancer treatment have led to a growing population of patients living with metastatic cancer. Symptom burden for these patients is understudied. Our objective is to report the prevalence and severity of SPPADE symptoms (sleep disturbance, pain, physical function impairment, anxiety, depression, and low energy /fatigue) in a large cohort of patients with metastatic cancer. Methods: These data are drawn from the Enhanced, EHR-facilitated Cancer Symptom Control (E2C2) stepped wedge pragmatic trial evaluating a symptom management intervention for cancer patients (NCT03892967). This analysis was limited to those identified with metastatic disease using ICD- codes and a natural language processing algorithm prior to or within 30 days of their baseline symptom survey. Symptom severity was measured on a 0-10 scale with scores of 1-3 categorized as “mild”, 4-6 as “moderate”, and ≥7 as “severe.” A SPPADE composite score was calculated by summing six individual symptom scores and is an indicator of total symptom burden. We report descriptive statistics for each symptom by severity category. We also test for differences in SPPADE composite score by race, disability status, employment status, education and cancer type using Kruskal-Wallis tests. Results: 12,824 patients with metastatic disease completed a survey between March 2019 and January 2023. Discretized score distributions for the SPPADE symptoms are reported in the Table. The SPPADE composite mean score for the cohort was 17.6 (SD +/- 12.0). Significant differences were found in total symptom burden by sociodemographic and clinical characteristics ( p<0.01): Higher total symptom burden (Mean [SD])was experienced by individuals who were American Indian/Alaska Native (AI/AN) (23.8[13.5]) or African American (AA) (20.5[14.7]), disabled (24.0[12.8]) or unemployed (21.1[13.0]), and had a high school education (20.0[13.3]) or less than high school education (18.5[12.4]). There were also statistically significant differences ( p<0.01) in symptom burden across cancer types, with patients with metastatic lung cancer reporting the highest symptom burden (20.0[12.2]) and those with metastatic melanoma reporting the lowest (14.7[11.4]). Conclusions: SPPADE symptoms are common in patients with metastatic cancer, especially fatigue, sleep disturbance, and physical function impairment. Symptom burden is especially high in AI/AN, AA, disabled/unemployed, and less educated patients. Further research is needed to tailor symptom interventions among those living with metastatic disease. [Table: see text]

AbstractBackgroundTechnology has revolutionized not only direct patient care but also diagnostic care processes. This study evaluates the transition from glass‐slide microscopy to digital pathology (DP) at a multisite academic institution, using mixed methods to understand user perceptions of digitization and key productivity metrics of practice change.MethodsParticipants included dermatopathologists, pathology reporting specialists, and clinicians. Electronic surveys and individual or group interviews included questions related to technology comfort, trust in DP, and rationale for DP adoption. Case volumes and turnaround times were abstracted from the electronic health record from Qtr 4 2020 to Qtr 1 2023 (inclusive). Data were analyzed descriptively, while interviews were analyzed using methods of content analysis.ResultsThirty‐four staff completed surveys and 22 participated in an interview. Case volumes and diagnostic turnaround time did not differ across the institution during or after implementation timelines (p = 0.084; p = 0.133, respectively). 82.5% (28/34) of staff agreed that DP improved the sign‐out experience, with accessibility, ergonomics, and annotation features described as key factors. Clinicians reported positive perspectives of DP impact on patient safety and interdisciplinary collaboration.ConclusionsOur study demonstrates that DP has a high acceptance rate, does not adversely impact productivity, and may improve patient safety and care collaboration.

Abstract Objectives: Carriers of pathogenic variants in high penetrance mutations, including BRCA 1 or BRCA 2 face higher lifetime risks of developing breast and tubo-ovarian cancers, and possibly endometrial cancers, than non-carriers. In particular, relative risks are higher among carriers than non-carriers at younger ages, suggesting the value of early initiation of breast cancer screening and the use of sensitive imaging methods, such as magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Further, breastfeeding appears protective for these three cancers in the general population, and potentially among mutation carriers, albeit based on limited evidence. Given that data related to knowledge and perspectives of carriers about these issues are limited, we surveyed mutation carriers regarding breastfeeding, cancer risk, and the deferral of breast cancer screening coinciding with reproductive events. These data may guide future cancer prevention research and developing of targeted communication campaigns. Methods: Researchers at Mayo Clinic, in collaboration with Facing Our Risk of Cancer Empowered (FORCE) – a large, national non-profit organization that addresses the needs of people and families affected by inherited mutations linked to cancer – designed and conducted a survey using the Mayo Clinic’s external RedCap system. The survey covered genetic testing and results, history of live births and breastfeeding history for mothers, history of risk-reducing surgery, personal cancer history, sources of information about cancer screening, breastfeeding knowledge, and breast cancer screening at various times, including during pregnancy, while breastfeeding, and after weaning. The survey was disseminated through FORCE’s electronic newsletter, website, social media pages, and advocacy partners. Survey responses were collected anonymously and analyzed descriptively using standard descriptive statistics, including frequency and percentages for categorical responses and means (SD) or medians (IQR) for continuously scaled responses. The open-ended responses were analyzed qualitatively using standard qualitative methodology. Results: Respondents included 253 women, of whom 88.7% were U.S. residents and 92.9% were white. The mean age + SD was 47(13) years, 61.7% were parous, with a mean age at first birth of 22.58 (13.16) years. Approximately 60% of women were carriers of mutations in BRCA1 or BRCA2 or both genes and all but two of the remaining women reported mutations in other genes linked to increased cancer risk. At the time of the survey, 92% of women had undergone a mammogram, with first screen at a mean age of 35 (6.49) years, and 85.3% had undergone breast MRI, with first screen at a mean age of 43 (12.39) years. Among 34.3% of participants, their 1st postpartum mammogram occurred &gt;3 years after the birth of their last child and 57% had 1st MRI 3 years postpartum. Preliminarily, our analysis shows that nearly 90% of women were unaware of their mutation status prior to pregnancy and approximately 1/3 did not undergo radiologic screening until 3 years postpartum. While 62.6% of respondents believed that breastfeeding lowers breast cancer risk, 74.2% of participants responded that nursing had no effect on tubo-ovarian cancer risk, and 78.2% considered that nursing did not impact endometrial cancer risk. Discussion and Conclusions: Preliminarily, we conclude that most women in the surveyed population were unaware of their mutation status when pregnant years earlier and many had not undergone screening until years after delivery. Many participants did not consider breastfeeding a potentially protective factor for women’s cancers. These data raise issues about the potential value of discussing genetic testing with women when considering family planning and mutation carriers, addressing complex issues about breast cancer screening while pregnant and breastfeeding. Citation Format: Laura Pacheco-Spann, Mark Sherman, Susan Friedman, Diane Rose, Miriam Levi, Alex Hochwald, Jennifer Ridgeway, Sophia Blumenfeld. Breastfeeding and Breast Cancer Screening Among Carriers of Pathogenic Variants in BRCA 1 and BRCA 2 and Other High Penetrance Genes: Knowledge and Perspectives [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2023 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2023 Dec 5-9; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2024;84(9 Suppl):Abstract nr PO5-08-03.

AbstractIntroductionShared decision‐making (SDM) is a method of care by which patients and clinicians work together to co‐create a plan of care. Electronic health record (EHR) integration of SDM tools may increase adoption of SDM. We conducted a “lightweight” integration of a freely available electronic SDM tool, CV Prevention Choice, within the EHRs of three healthcare systems. Here, we report how the healthcare systems collaborated to achieve integration.MethodsThis work was conducted as part of a stepped wedge randomized pragmatic trial. CV Prevention Choice was developed using guidelines for HTML5‐based web applications. Healthcare systems integrated the tool in their EHR using documentation the study team developed and refined with lessons learned after each system integrated the electronic SDM tool into their EHR. CV Prevention Choice integration populates the tool with individual patient data locally without sending protected health information between the EHR and the web. Data abstraction and secure transfer systems were developed to manage data collection to assess tool implementation and effectiveness outcomes.ResultsTime to integrate CV Prevention Choice in the EHR was 12.1 weeks for the first system, 10.4 weeks for the second, and 9.7 weeks for the third. One system required two 1‐hour meetings with study team members and two healthcare systems required a single 1‐hour meeting. Healthcare system information technology teams collaborated by sharing information and offering improvements to documentation. Challenges included tracking CV Prevention Choice use for reporting and capture of combination medications. Data abstraction required refinements to address differences in how each healthcare system captured data elements.ConclusionTargeted documentation on tool features and resource mapping supported collaboration of IT teams across healthcare systems, enabling them to integrate a web‐based SDM tool with little additional research team effort or oversight. Their collaboration helped overcome difficulties integrating the web application and address challenges to data harmonization for trial outcome analyses.

Abstract Rationale Endotracheal intubation is the third most common bedside procedure in U.S. hospitals. In over 40% of intubations, preventable complications attributable to human factors occur. A better understanding of team dynamics during intubation may improve patient safety. Objectives To explore team dynamics and safety-related actions during emergent endotracheal intubations in the emergency department and intensive care unit and to engage members of the care team in reflection for process improvement through a novel video-based team debriefing technique. Methods Video-reflexive ethnography involves in situ video recording and reflexive discussions with practitioners to scrutinize behaviors and to identify opportunities for improvement. In this study, real-time intubations were recorded in the emergency department and intensive care unit at Mayo Clinic Rochester, and facilitated video-reflexive sessions were conducted with the multidisciplinary procedural teams. Themes about team dynamics and safety-related action were identified inductively from transcriptions of recorded sessions. Results Between December 2022 and January 2023, eight video-reflexive sessions were conducted with a total of 78 participants. Multidisciplinary members included nurses (n = 23), respiratory therapists (n = 16), pharmacists (n = 7), advanced practitioners (n = 5), and physicians (n = 26). In video-reflexive discussions, major safety gaps were identified and several solutions were proposed related to the use of a multidisciplinary intubation checklist, standardized communication and team positioning, developing a culture of safety, and routinely debriefing after the procedure. Conclusions The findings of this study may inform the development of a team supervision model for emergent endotracheal intubations. This approach could integrate key components such as a multidisciplinary intubation checklist, standardized communication and team positioning, a culture of safety, and debriefing as part of the procedure itself.

Abstract INTRODUCTION Disparities in breast cancer (BC) screening are observed between Hispanic and non-Hispanic White women and stronger amongst Hispanic women with under- and uninsured statuses.1-2 Risk-based screening has been recommended by professional societies, including American Cancer Society, starting at age 30 and may be an important strategy for reducing disparities.3 The purpose of the study was to characterize whether women had been told their personal risk of BC and to identify differences in characteristics of patients informed of their personal risk. METHODS This is a cross-sectional analysis of data from a supplemental self-reported survey to an NIH-funded randomized trial conducted at a large Federally Qualified Health Center (FQHC) in Arizona (R01 MD09682-05). The survey was sent to a randomized 600 of the 1,356 participants. Between November 2022 and April 2023, 177 women completed the survey (response rate 29.5%). Participants were asked if a doctor or other healthcare provider had ever talked to them about their personal risk for BC. Differences between those who recalled being told their personal risk for BC and those who did not were assessed using Fisher exact test. RESULTS Overall, 66.3% were 50 years or older, 81.8% who speak primarily Spanish, and 64.8% of respondents had less than a high school education. Also, 22.4% reported a family history of BC, 27.4% have been previously recalled for additional imaging, 10.8% have had a history of prior breast biopsy, 59.9% stated having a regular provider, and 53.1% were found to have dense breast category C or D at screening visit. 40% did not report having a regular doctor although all participants received care at an FQHC. 30.5% of respondents stated that a healthcare professional had ever talked to them about their personal risk for BC. There was a trend toward women with a main doctor being more likely to recall being told their personal risk for BC as compared to those without a main doctor (38.5% vs 22.5%, p=0.06). CONCLUSIONS In this cohort of primarily Spanish-speaking Hispanic women who have had mammography screening and written report of their breast density, about a third of respondents recall being informed of their personal BC risk. These observations need to be confirmed in a larger population with greater response rate, but these results suggest that there is a cohort of patients who need different approaches for conveying risk. REFERENCES 1. Jadav, S., Rajan, S. S., Abughosh, S., & Sansgiry, S. S. (2015). The Role of Socioeconomic Status and Health Care Access in Breast Cancer Screening Compliance Among Hispanics. Journal of Public Health Management and Practice, 21(5), 467–476. https://www.jstor.org/stable/48517175 2. American Cancer Society. (2017). Breast cancer facts & figures 2017-2018. Atlanta, GA: American Cancer Society, Inc. 3. ACS Breast Cancer Screening Guidelines. (2022, January 14). https://www.cancer.org/cancer/types/breast-cancer/screening-tests-and-early-detection/american-cancer-society-recommendations-for-the-early-detection-of-breast-cancer.htm Citation Format: Jhenitza P. Raygoza Tapia, Sarah M. Jenkins, Jennifer L. Ridgeway, Aaron D. Norman, Crystal R. Gonzalez, Valentina Hernandez, Bhavika K. Patel, Celine M. Vachon, Jessica D. Austin. Communicating breast cancer risk to Spanish-speaking Hispanic women [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 C126.

AbstractCancer and its treatment produce deleterious symptoms across the phases of care. Poorly controlled symptoms negatively affect quality of life and result in increased health-care needs and hospitalization. The Improving the Management of symPtoms during And following Cancer Treatment (IMPACT) Consortium was created to develop 3 large-scale, systematic symptom management systems, deployed through electronic health record platforms, and to test them in pragmatic, randomized, hybrid effectiveness and implementation trials. Here, we describe the IMPACT Consortium’s conceptual framework, its organizational components, and plans for evaluation. The study designs and lessons learned are highlighted in the context of disruptions related to the COVID-19 pandemic.