Citations

ABSTRACT Purpose This study assesses the association between colorectal cancer (CRC) screening and a validated, housing-based measure of individual-level socioeconomic status (SES, called HOUSES hereafter) within rural communities and determines whether HOUSES-integrated geospatial analysis can be used to tailor interventions. Methods We used CRC screening data from a subset of Mayo Clinic Midwest patients living in cities without ready access to routine care in the Mayo Clinic Health System in 2019 to represent rural communities. At the individual level, we assessed the association between CRC screening rates and the HOUSES index, adjusting for age, sex, race/ethnicity, comorbidity, distance from home address to clinic, and area deprivation index, using a multilevel mixed-effects logistic regression model. Additionally, we conducted geospatial analysis to examine the correlation between hotspots of 1) lower CRC screening rates and 2) lower SES of the subject population (HOUSES quartile 1). Findings Among 34,489 individuals (median age 64.0 years, 52.4% female), those with the lowest SES (HOUSES Q1) had 37% lower odds of being CRC screening adherent than those with the highest SES (HOUSES Q4) (adj. OR [95% CI]: 0.63 [0.58-0.69]). In the 14 identified HOUSES Q1 hotspots, there was a significant correlation in counts of HOUSES Q1 and low CRC screening (correlation coefficient=0.81). Conclusion Lower SES was significantly associated with lower CRC screening among rural populations. HOUSES-enabled geospatial analysis identified geographic hotspots with lower CRC screening rates for targeted interventions to address disparities in CRC screening in rural communities. HOUSES may be a useful digital tool for cancer preventive care and research.

Abstract Rural and low-socioeconomic status women face social determinants of health barriers leading to disproportionately low rates of breast cancer screening and markedly reduced participation in clinical trials. To address this gap, we developed the WeCARE (Women’s Engagement for Cancer Awareness, Resources, and Education) intervention using a community-engaged approach. This paper describes how Community Advisory Board feedback informed the development of Mayo Clinic Health System’s WeCARE intervention components. Their input was systematically analyzed using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR 2.0) to identify determinants of acceptability, appropriateness, and feasibility and to guide actionable refinements to intervention content and delivery.

Abstract Colony-stimulating factor 1 receptor-related adult-onset leukoencephalopathy with axonal spheroids and pigmented glia (CSF1R-ALSP) is a rare, fatal, autosomal-dominant neurodegenerative disorder caused by pathogenic CSF1R variants and characterized by progressive cognitive, neuropsychiatric, and motor dysfunction, white matter lesions on brain imaging, and white matter demyelination, swollen axons, and pigmented glial cells on pathology. Limited data regarding clinical, biofluid or radiological biomarkers of disease severity are available, and no clinical trial endpoints have yet been validated. The objectives of this first-of-its-kind, prospective, observational natural history study were to characterize the clinical trajectory of CSF1R-ALSP and to identify and evaluate key biomarkers and clinical endpoints indicative of disease severity and progression. ILLUMINATE (NCT05020743) was a multicentre, noninterventional natural history study of adults with CSF1R-ALSP and prodromal carriers of CSF1R variants. Participants were followed for up to 36 months, with clinical assessments, fluid biomarkers and volumetric MRI assessments of brain atrophy collected at screening and every 6 months. This study was terminated early (4 June 2025). The analyses reported here include data collected through 19 February 2025. Of 53 participants, 19 were prodromal and 34 were symptomatic (11 of whom had a history of haematopoietic stem cell transplant and 23 who did not). Mean participant age was 47.8 (standard deviation, 4.5) years, and 36.4% were female. Prodromal participants remained relatively stable over 36 months, with little change in neurological function, neurodegeneration biomarkers or radiological disease burden. Impaired neurological function, MRI characteristics of CSF1R-ALSP, and elevated NfL (neurofilament light chain; neurodegeneration biomarker) and GFAP (glial fibrillary acidic protein; astrogliosis biomarker) levels were more pronounced at baseline and often showed progression over time among symptomatic participants who had not previously received haematopoietic stem cell transplant compared with participants who had previously received haematopoietic stem cell transplant. Significant correlations were observed at baseline and longitudinally between MRI measures of brain atrophy and clinical outcome measures. Based on the fluid biomarkers, MRI measures, and clinical outcome assessments evaluated here, active neurodegeneration, widespread changes visualized on brain MRI, and impaired cognitive and motor function were observed in symptomatic patients with CSF1R-ALSP. The neurological impairment can be assessed using the Montreal Cognitive Assessment and Cortical Basal ganglia Functional Scale. Our data suggest that quantification of brain atrophy using MRI volumetry is a potential biomarker of disease severity and progression in CSF1R-ALSP. It is hoped that this report will contribute to the understanding of disease progression in CSF1R-ALSP and inform future drug development.

Community engagement and trust are vital to medical education and improving health. The experience of national level, extramural seed grant programs to support faculty in both education and health care delivery with the focus of building trust has not been previously reported. The authors reviewed a total of four cohorts of the “Building Trust: Advancing Health Equity” grant recipients supported by the ABIM Foundation and other funding partners. Over $1.5 million was awarded from 2021 to 2024, which represented 92 grants ranging from $2,500–$40,000 each. The geographic regions receiving the most grants and funding were the middle and south Atlantic, and the Pacific regions in the United States. University programs received more grants and funding than affiliated or community programs. The majority of project types primarily focused on developing educational curricula for internal medicine residents (68%) and engaging with local communities (19%). The approach to implementation often included service-learning and community experts (29%), quality improvement and patient care delivery methods (22%), and traditional curriculum development (21%). The most common education topic themes were health equity and social determinants of health (43%) and addressing bias in care delivery and learning environment (20%). The Building Trust grant program reflects the unique needs of local communities and supported innovative practices and educational techniques. Implementation support was provided to grantees through shared experiences and mentorship. Evaluating outcomes upon completion of grants will be an imperative next step. This serves as a model that can inform institutions and other professional organizations approaching implementation of seed grant funding.

Abstract Rationale Impaired lung health may serve as a risk factor for, and a post-acute sequela of, SARS-CoV-2 infection. Yet most prior studies of lung health sequelae of COVID-19 lacked information on pre-infection lung health, a major antecedent confounder. To identify associations of COVID-19 with changes in lung health, we leveraged paired pre- and post-pandemic data on respiratory symptoms, lung function, and lung structure in a general population-based cohort. Methods We studied participants in the Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis Lung Study with paired pre-pandemic (2016-2018) and post-pandemic (2022-2024) assessments of respiratory symptoms, spirometry, and lung CT. SARS-CoV-2 infection (2020-2023) was ascertained using a composite of questionnaires, serology, and medical record adjudication, and classified as severe (requiring hospitalization) or non-severe (not requiring hospitalization). Lung health was assessed by questionnaire (mMRC grade ≥2 dyspnea, chronic cough, chronic phlegm, chronic bronchitis), pre-bronchodilator spirometry (FEV1, FVC, FEV1:FVC), and lung density on non-contrast lung CT (% low attenuation areas, % high attenuation areas). Each post-pandemic lung health measure was regressed on infection history and the corresponding pre-pandemic lung health measure, adjusting for age at post-pandemic exam, sex, race/ethnicity, smoking status, and vaccination status at infection. Sensitivity analyses were included- (a) restriction to participants without pre-pandemic respiratory symptoms and (b) with additional adjustment for time since infection and variant wave. Results Among 2,015 participants (mean age 77.2±7.5 years; 55% female; 40% non-Hispanic White; 25% Black; 11% Asian; 23% Hispanic/Latino), 59 (3%) experienced severe and 506 (25%) non-severe SARS-CoV-2 infection. The prevalence of respiratory symptoms was similar or slightly higher at the post- vs. pre-pandemic exam (grade ≥2 dyspnea: 14% vs. 10%; chronic cough: 10% vs. 8%; chronic phlegm: 9% vs. 8%; chronic bronchitis: 4% vs. 4%; p-values <0.0001). Compared with participants without infection, those with severe infection had higher odds of chronic cough (OR:2.9, 95%CI:1.3-6.3) and chronic bronchitis (OR:3.3, 95%CI:1.2-9.0) at the post-pandemic exam (Table). Associations were stronger among individuals infected >90 days prior to the post-pandemic assessment and during pre-Omicron waves. Results were similar when restricted to participants without pre-pandemic symptoms. No significant associations were observed for non-severe infection (vs. no infection) or for any other lung health outcomes. Conclusions Controlling for pre-pandemic lung health, severe COVID-19 was associated with increased odds of chronic cough and chronic bronchitis but not with changes in lung function or structure in a general population-based sample. Non-severe COVID-19 was not associated with lung health outcomes. This abstract is funded by: OT2HL156812, R21HL165405, R01HL077612, 75N92025D00022, 75N92025D00026, 75N92020D00002, 75N92025D00024, 75N92025D00027, 75N92025D00025, 75N92025D00028

ABSTRACT First‐line therapy for mantle cell lymphoma (MCL) represents a critical opportunity for clinical benefit via sustained complete response. We conducted a phase 2 multicenter trial in the academic and community cancer research united (ACCRU) network, testing a multitargeted 1st line regimen. CARiBOU (ACCRU‐LY‐1804) employs alternating VR‐CAP and R‐cytarabine with continuous acalabrutinib, in six 21‐day cycles, for previously untreated MCL. The primary endpoint was complete metabolic response (CMR) rate. Secondary endpoints included safety, feasibility of stem cell collection, proportion proceeding to ASCT, and progression‐free (PFS) and overall survival (OS). Peripheral blood measurable residual disease (MRD) was tested using the ClonoSEQ assay (Adaptive Biotechnologies). Of 41 patients enrolled, 39 (95%) responded to therapy, including 37 patients achieving CMR (90%). Two nonresponders discontinued therapy for toxicity early, prior to study‐defined restaging, and received alternate therapy. Undetectable MRD at a 10 6 threshold was achieved in 26/33 tested patients (79%), and 94% at 10 5 . 18‐month estimated PFS is 79% (95% CI 64%–97%), and OS is 96% (95% CI 88%–100%). Toxicities were primarily hematologic (grade 3 hematologic AE in 32 patients, [78%]). Twelve required platelet transfusions, and one grade 3 bleeding event occurred. Febrile neutropenia occurred in 4 patients, and 6 (14%) experienced SAEs. There were no treatment‐related deaths. CARiBOU is an efficient, highly effective outpatient 1st line MCL regimen, employing intermediate‐dose cytarabine and continuous acalabrutinib for 6 cycles. This multitargeted regimen addresses the biologic heterogeneity of MCL and permits flexible MRD‐guided decisions on consolidation and maintenance. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT04626791

Introduction Women residing in rural areas or belonging to lower socioeconomic status (SES) strata experience disproportionately low rates of breast cancer screening, contributing to delayed diagnoses and poorer prognoses. In addition, their participation in clinical trials remains markedly limited, reducing opportunities to access preventive and screening interventions. Promoting research preparedness among women before disease onset may empower them to make informed decisions regarding their health and willingness to participate in clinical research with fewer emotional and logistical barriers. Methods and analysis This project applies a community-based participatory research approach to develop and refine the WeCARE (Women’s Engagement for Cancer Awareness, Resources and Education) intervention for women aged 50–74 years who have either never undergone breast cancer screening or have not received screening in the past 5 years and who reside in rural areas or belong to low SES groups. The intervention consists of two components. Component 1 is a single-day, in-person community forum that includes (a) an educational seminar led by an oncologist to address breast cancer risk and screening guidelines, (b) survivor storytelling to enhance emotional engagement and cultural resonance and (c) facilitated navigation to breast cancer screening and future research participation. Component 2 involves structured post-forum follow-up through multiple touchpoints (phone calls and mailed boosters) to reinforce knowledge, address barriers and support screening completion and research enrolment. Quantitative data (eg, screening completion, satisfaction and follow-up engagement) will be summarised using descriptive statistics to assess feasibility and reach on 50 participants. Qualitative feedback from participants will undergo thematic analysis to identify barriers, facilitators and perceived cultural relevance. Integrated mixed-method interpretation will inform iterative refinement of the WeCARE intervention and guide design of subsequent larger trials. Ethics and dissemination Approved by the Mayo Clinic Institutional Review Board (IRB #25–008934). All participants will provide informed consent. Procedures ensure confidentiality, cultural sensitivity and participant safety. Data will be stored in REDCap and disseminated through publications, conferences, local town halls and community reports.