Jatoi, Aminah

PURPOSE This national study was undertaken to determine screening mammography rates among transgender and gender diverse (TGD) individuals. METHODS TGD individuals and cisgender women who qualified to receive screening mammography based on American College of Radiology guidelines were identified in the longitudinal OptumLabs Data Warehouse. The primary end point was the percentage of patients who had high rates of screening (>75% recommended screenings). Multivariable analyses were conducted in a matched population of transgender men to cisgender women to identify and adjust for factors associated with high adherence. Individuals were matched at a 1:4 ratio (transgender men: cisgender women) on age, race/ethnicity, year of enrollment in their health care plan, and duration of follow-up. RESULTS This study focused on 10,478 TGD individuals (3,778 transgender men; 1,294 transgender women; 5,406 with gender dysphoria not meeting other TGD criteria, NMOT) and 6,218,369 cisgender women. For transgender men, transgender women, individuals with gender dysphoria NMOT, and cisgender women, high mammography rates were observed in 41.1% (95% CI, 39.5 to 42.6), 7.4% (95% CI, 6.0 to 8.8), 11.9% (95% CI, 11.0 to 12.7), and 38.3% (95% CI, 38.3 to 38.4), respectively ( P < .0001). When transgender men were compared with 15,112 matched cisgender women, an age-based differential association was observed between sex and high mammography rates (interaction P = .0003); compared with cisgender women, transgender men appeared more likely to manifest high rates of screening at age 40-49 years (odds ratios [ORs], 1.38 [95% CI, 1.28 to 1.50]; P < .0001) and 50-59 years (OR, 1.57 [95% CI, 1.35 to 1.81]; P < .0001) but not in the older age groups. CONCLUSION The relatively high rates of screening mammography in cisgender women and transgender men suggest clinicians are offering mammography to individuals who are at average or high breast cancer risk, as compared with cisgender women, and not to transgender women at low risk.

Objectives On rare occasions, hiccups can cause morbidity, such as sleep deprivation, aspiration and even death. At times, palliative invasive procedures are considered. This study tested the hypothesis that invasive procedures can provide hiccup palliation with an acceptable safety profile. Methods Multi-site electronic medical data were used to assess adult patients who underwent an invasive procedure for hiccups between January 1995 and January 2022. Hiccup palliation was defined as documented improvement in severity or frequency of this sign/symptom after the procedure. Results A total of 69 patients underwent one or more invasive procedures for hiccups (144 total procedures). Fifty-nine patients (86%) were men. The most frequent initial procedure was a phrenic nerve block (n=10) followed by oesophageal dilation (n=9). Only 31 patients (45%) manifested hiccup palliation after their first procedure. Nearly half, or 32 patients (46%), underwent more than one procedure (2 underwent nine procedures). Of these subsequent procedures, 35 resulted in palliation. Five adverse events arose from 144 procedures: post-esophagectomy atrial fibrillation, haematoma after cardiac device removal, vocal cord immobility after craniotomy, vocal cord immobility after vagal nerve manipulation, and a cerebral spinal leak after vagal nerve decompression. Conclusions Invasive procedures can palliate hiccups with an acceptable safety profile. However, these procedures appear to palliate hiccups in only about half of patients and sometimes do so only transiently.

Abstract Background Unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (uHCC) is a leading cause of cancer death. FDA-approved first-line systemic therapies include atezolizumab/bevacizumab (atezo/bev) and durvalumab/tremelimumab (durva/treme); however, there is a lack of comparative data. Methods We reviewed outcomes of patients with uHCC who initiated atezo/bev or durva/treme between 2017 and 2024, across six institutions. Overall survival (OS) and time to treatment discontinuation (TTD) were analyzed using the Kaplan–Meier and Cox models, adjusting for baseline characteristics. Results Four hundred fifty-two uHCC pts were included. Median age: 68 years; 77% male; 81% white. Most common etiologies were viral hepatitis (38.9%) and metabolic dysfunction-associated steatohepatitis (19.5%). Disease progression was the primary reason for treatment discontinuation, atezo/bev (56%) and durva/treme (42%). Outcomes were not statistically significant (median OS [month, m]: 14.0 vs 14.6 [P = .66]; median TTD [m]: 4.9 vs 3.9 [P = .42] for atezo/bev vs durva/treme). Outcomes were significantly different between Child-Pugh classes (CP: A, B7, B8/9, C) respectively, median OS(m): 19.0, 6.1, 5.1, 2.0 (P &lt; .001); median TTD(m): 6.1, 2.3, 3.0, 1.3 (P &lt; .001). Conclusions In this real-world study of uHCC, no significant difference in clinical outcomes was observed between atezo/bev and durva/treme in the first-line setting. CP scores were a key prognostic variable with both regimens.

Abstract Background Atezolizumab plus bevacizumab (A/B) received FDA approval as the first-line therapy for patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in 2020. However, optimal subsequent treatment options are unclear. Here, we describe clinical outcomes of advanced HCC patients following first-line treatment with A/B. Patients and Methods We conducted a multi-site analysis of patients with HCC treated with first-line A/B between January 2018 and December 2022 at Mayo Clinic. This study cohort included all patients receiving second-line systemic therapy after A/B. Median overall survival (OS) and time-to-treatment discontinuation (TTD) were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Child Pugh (CP) scores are also described at diagnosis, prior to first line, and prior to second-line therapy. Results Of the 342 patients who received A/B, 107 (31.3%) received second-line treatments including anti-VEGF therapy or immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) and were included in the final analysis. Median OS for all patients was 11.1 months from initiation of second-line therapy. Median OS was 10.7 months (95% CI: 7.2-12.8) and 15.7 months (95%CI: 6.8-NE) for those receiving anti-VEGF inhibitors and ICI ( P = .50). Median TTD for second-line therapies was 2.4 months (95% CI: 1.7-3.3) and 2.6 months (95% CI: 1.5-5.1) for anti-VEGF inhibitors and ICI, respectively (P = .87). In multivariate analyses, CP was significantly associated with survival. Conclusion Following first-line A/B treatment, there is no statistically significant difference in survival between ICI and anti-VEGF therapy, nor in time to treatment discontinuation. CP score remains an important prognostic tool.

Background Older LGBTQIA+ patients face discrimination in healthcare and therefore are sometimes reluctant to engage and interact with healthcare providers. This report explores whether a large medically-based internet platform can be used to engage these patients and describes preferable methods for doing so. Methods This study used Mayo Clinic Connect, a continuously monitored, internet-based social media platform of 100,000-plus users. Participants completed a brief on-line survey to ensure their study eligibility. No patient-identifying data was asked. Participants then were to call in by phone during specified day time hours for a 45-minute qualitative interview. Alternatively, as a second subsequent option, they were to complete an on-line typed response to 4 questions about their health and healthcare. No temporal overlap occurred between the availability of the phone interview option and the typed-in response option. Results For the phone interviews, 17 of 64 individuals were deemed eligible, but no individual called in to be interviewed. In contrast, for the typed-in response option, 20 of 37 individuals were eligible and provided comments. Conclusion A large medically-based internet platform can be used to engage older LGBTQIA+ patients, but the use of typed-in comments appears more successful, presumably because of greater anonymity and convenience.

Abstract Purpose: AB160 is a 160-nm nano-immunoconjugate consisting of nab-paclitaxel (ABX) nanoparticles noncovalently coated with bevacizumab (BEV) for targeted delivery into tissues expressing high levels of VEGF. Preclinical data showed that AB160 resulted in greater tumor targeting and tumor inhibition compared with sequential treatment with ABX then BEV. Given individual drug activity, we investigated the safety and toxicity of AB160 in patients with gynecologic cancers. Patients and Methods: A 3+3 phase I trial was conducted with three potential dose levels in patients with previously treated endometrial, cervical, and platinum-resistant ovarian cancer to ascertain the recommended phase II dose (RP2D). AB160 was administered intravenously on days 1, 8, and 15 of a 28-day cycle (ABX 75–175 mg/m2, BEV 30–70 mg/m2). Pharmacokinetic analyses were performed. Results: No dose-limiting toxicities (DLT) were seen among the three dose levels tested. Grade 3/4 toxicities included neutropenia, thromboembolic events, and leukopenia. DL2 (ABX 150 mg/m2, BEV 60 mg/m2) was chosen as the RP2D. Seven of the 19 patients with measurable disease (36.8%) had confirmed partial responses (95% confidence interval, 16.3%–61.6%). Pharmacokinetic analyses demonstrated that AB160 allowed 50% higher paclitaxel dosing and that paclitaxel clearance mirrored that of therapeutic antibodies. Conclusions: The safety profile and clinical activity of AB160 supports further clinical testing in patients with gynecologic cancers; the RP2D is DL2 (ABX 150 mg/m2, BEV 60 mg/m2).

Abstract Data evaluating change in body composition during treatment of advanced cancer are limited. Here we evaluated computed tomography (CT)–based changes in muscle mass during treatment for advanced ovarian cancer (OC) and association with outcomes. We analyzed the preoperative and posttreatment skeletal muscle index (SMI), skeletal muscle area normalized for height of 109 patients with advanced OC who underwent primary surgery and platinum-based chemotherapy from 2006 to 2016. Based on an SMI less than 39 cm2/m2, 54.1% of patients were never sarcopenic, 24.8% were sarcopenic on both CT scans, and 21.1% were newly sarcopenic upon treatment completion. Patients who lost muscle during treatment had the worst survival of the 3 groups identified: median survival 2.6 years vs 4.6 years if sarcopenic on both CT scans and 4.8 years if never sarcopenic. Loss of muscle portends a poor prognosis among patients with OC. Additional research is needed to better understand and best mitigate these changes.

Background Chronic pain in cancer survivors negatively impacts quality of life. This study sought to investigate the relationship between high-impact chronic pain (HICP) -- defined as chronic pain that limits life or work activities on most days or every day in the past 3 months -- and cannabis in cancer survivors. Methods An electronic survey was developed in conjunction with the National Cancer Institute Comprehensive Cancer Centers in the United States. This survey was distributed to cancer survivors within a multi-site, single institution setting. Results The survey response rate was 23.0% (2304/10,000); 72.7% of these patients (1676/2304) did in fact have a confirmed cancer diagnosis. Among these cancer survivors, 16.5% (unweighted 278/1676) had HICP, and 12.4% (208/1676) reported cannabis use since their cancer diagnosis. The prevalence of past 30-day cannabis use was 12.3% (206/1676). Compared to cancer survivors without pain, those with HICP were more likely to believe in the benefits of cannabis (unweighted 92.1% vs. 74.7%; age-adjusted odds ratio [OR] = 3.1; 95% CI: 1.9-5.1) and less likely to believe in its risks (unweighted 48.2% vs. 58.4%; age-adjusted OR = 0.6; 95% CI: 0.4-0.7). Conclusions Cancer survivors with HICP have a higher prevalence of cannabis use compared to those patients without pain. More research is needed to advance pain and symptom management among cancer survivors and to identify clinical scenarios in which benefit is greater than potential harm.

Background: Epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) inhibitors cause cutaneous toxicity in over 90% of patients. Conceivably, healthcare providers could overlook such toxicity in African American/Black patients because of a darker complexion. This qualitative study sought to learn about such cutaneous signs and symptoms and, if present, to report them in patients’ own words. Methods: Any patient who self-identified as African American/Black and who had been prescribed an EGFR inhibitor was eligible. The current report focuses on patients’ responses to the following question, “What have you noticed since starting your cancer treatment (the EGFR inhibitor), any particular symptoms or reactions, positive or negative?” All interview data were audio-recorded, transcribed, and then independently coded and analyzed by two investigators. Results: Fifteen patients are the focus of this report, and all described cutaneous toxicity. Patients appeared troubled by the cosmetic aspect of these drug-induced skin changes, including their acneiform appearance, describing “little pimples with little, little pus in it.” Notable were comments on hyperpigmentation, “I’m a black person but…. became darker.” Furthermore, patients experienced physical symptoms: “it itches;” “it’s like you stuck a pin in it;” “stinging;” and “burning;”. Conclusion: Although cutaneous toxicity from EGFR inhibitors might be more difficult to visualize among darkly complected patients, the graphic descriptions offered in this qualitative study underscore the need for clinicians to heighten their awareness of such toxicity in African American/Black patients.