Citations

While significant progress has been made in reducing disparities within the US health care system, notable gaps remain. This article explores existing disparities within pediatric congenital heart disease care. Congenital heart disease, the most common birth defect and a leading cause of infant death, has garnered substantial attention, revealing certain disparities within the US health care system. Factors such as race, ethnicity, insurance coverage, socioeconomic status, and geographic location are all commonalities that significantly affect health disparities in pediatric congenital heart disease. This comprehensive review sheds light on disparities from diverse perspectives in pediatric care, demonstrates the inequities and inequalities leading to these disparities, presents effective solutions, and issues a call to action for providers, institutions, and the health care system. Recognizing and addressing these disparities is imperative for ensuring equitable care and enhancing the long‐term well‐being of children affected by congenital heart disease. Implementing robust, evidence‐based frameworks that promote responsible and safe interventions is fundamental to enduring change.

Abstract Telemedicine has routinely been used in cancer care delivery for the past 3 years. The current state of digital health provides convenience and efficiency for both health-care professional and patient, but challenges exist in equitable access to virtual services. As increasingly newer technologies are added to telehealth platforms, it is essential to eliminate barriers to access through technical, procedural, and legislative improvements. Moving forward, implementation of new strategies can help eliminate disparities in virtual cancer care, facilitate delivery of treatment in the home, and improve real-time data collection for patient safety and clinical trial participation. The ultimate goal will be to extend high-quality survival for all patients with cancer through improved digital delivery of cancer care.

Abstract Background Few antiviral therapies have been studied in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and kidney impairment. Herein, the efficacy, safety, and pharmacokinetics of remdesivir, its metabolites, and sulfobutylether-β-cyclodextrin excipient were evaluated in hospitalized patients with COVID-19 and severe kidney impairment. Methods In REDPINE, a phase 3, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study, participants aged ≥12 years hospitalized for COVID-19 pneumonia with acute kidney injury, chronic kidney disease, or kidney failure were randomized 2:1 to receive intravenous remdesivir (200 mg on day 1; 100 mg daily up to day 5) or placebo (enrollment from March 2021 to March 2022). The primary efficacy end point was the composite of the all-cause mortality rate or invasive mechanical ventilation rate through day 29. Safety was evaluated through day 60. Results Although enrollment concluded early, 243 participants were enrolled and treated (remdesivir, n = 163; placebo, n = 80). At baseline, 90 participants (37.0%) had acute kidney injury (remdesivir, n = 60; placebo, n = 30), 64 (26.3%) had chronic kidney disease (remdesivir, n = 44; placebo, n = 20), and 89 (36.6%) had kidney failure (remdesivir, n = 59; placebo, n = 30); and 31 (12.8%) were vaccinated against COVID-19. Composite all-cause mortality or invasive mechanical ventilation rates through day 29 were 29.4% and 32.5% in the remdesivir and placebo group, respectively (P = .61). Treatment-emergent adverse events were reported in 80.4% for remdesivir versus 77.5% for placebo, and serious adverse events in 50.3% versus 50.0%, respectively. Pharmacokinetic plasma exposure to remdesivir was not affected by kidney function. Conclusions Although the study was underpowered, no significant difference in efficacy was observed between treatment groups. REDPINE demonstrated that remdesivir is safe in patients with COVID-19 and severe kidney impairment. Clinical Trials Registration EudraCT 2020-005416-22; Clinical Trials.gov NCT04745351.

TPS3633 Background: For patients with oligometastatic colorectal cancer (CRC), aggressive local therapy of isolated metastases, particularly in the liver, has been associated with long-term progression-free and overall survival (OS) primarily based on retrospective evidence. However, in patients with limited metastatic CRC that is deemed inoperable or those with additional disease outside of the liver or lungs, the role of local ablative therapies, including microwave ablation (MWA) and stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT), to render patients disease free is less clear. Further, despite the long history of treating oligometastatic CRC with local therapy, which is provider biased and not evidence based, questions remain regarding the benefit of extending the paradigm of metastatic directed therapy to patients with more extensive disease. This trial seeks to use a pragmatic multimodality approach that mirrors the current clinical dilemma. This study is designed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of adding total ablative therapy (TAT) of all sites of disease to standard of care systemic treatment in those with limited metastatic CRC. Methods: A022101/NRG-GI009 is a National Clinical Trials Network randomized phase III study planned to enroll 364 patients with newly diagnosed metastatic CRC (BRAF wild-type, microsatellite stable) with ≤4 sites of metastatic disease on baseline imaging. Liver-only metastatic disease is not permitted, and lesions must be amenable to any combination of surgical resection, MWA, and/or SBRT with SBRT required for at least 1 lesion. Patients receive first-line systemic therapy for 16-26 weeks and are then randomized 1:1, stratified by number of metastatic organ sites (1-2 vs. 3-4), timing of metastatic disease diagnosis (de novo vs. secondary), and presence of metastatic disease outside the liver/lungs in at least 1 site. Patients in Arm 1 will receive TAT consisting of treatment of all metastatic sites with SBRT ± MWA ± surgical resection followed by standard of care systemic therapy. Patients in Arm 2 will continue with standard of care systemic therapy alone. The primary endpoint is OS. Secondary endpoints include event-free survival, treatment-related toxicities, and local recurrence with exploratory biomarker analyses. The study needs 346 evaluable patients combined in the 2 arms to demonstrate an improvement in OS with a hazard ratio of 0.7 to provide 80% power with a one-sided alpha of 5%. The trial utilizes a group sequential design with two interim analyses (25% and 50% of events) for futility. The trial activated in January 2023 and recruitment is ongoing. Support: U10CA180821, U10CA180882; https://acknowledgments.alliancefound.org. U10CA180820 (ECOG-ACRIN); U10CA180868 (NRG); U10CA180888 (SWOG); Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT05673148 Clinical trial information: NCT05673148 .

11113 Background: Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are valuable for understanding treatment tolerability and toxicity. I-SPY2 is a phase-II neoadjuvant clinical trial for breast cancer with electronic PROs and quality of life (QOL) assessments. We sought to understand how well the GP5 self-reported tolerability item reflected toxicity burden and QOL during treatment and follow-up in I-SPY 2 participants. Methods: Our study included 306 patients who completed the FACIT Item GP5 and answered PROMIS surveys at two or more timepoints. Analysis timepoints included screening (SC), inter-regimen (IR), pre-surgery (PS), 1-month post-surgery (FU1), and 6-months post-surgery (FU2). Symptoms were assessed weekly using PRO-CTCAE and CTCAEv4.0. QOL was evaluated using PROMIS. The GP5: “I am bothered by side effects of treatment,” was used to estimate tolerability, where worse tolerability is a higher score. Odds ratios, Spearman correlation, and regularized multi-variate regression were used to evaluate the associations between individual symptoms and adverse events with GP5 scores. Results: Demographic information was available for 243 of the 306 (70.2%) participants (median age=47,73.7% white). In the 306, tolerability scores worsened over study treatment, with a maximum mean score of 1.71 at Cycle 11. Tolerability improved after treatment cessation at FU1(1.09). Mean tolerability at week 6 was 1.53. The only clinical factor that was associated with early change in tolerability (week 6 to PS) was age >50 (mean score ranged from 1.55-1.70 vs 1.29-1.45 (age<50), p<0.05). PRO-CTCAE and GP5 correlative analysis suggested that higher grade abdominal pain, decreased appetite, dizziness and blurry vision significantly associated with higher GP5 scores at multiple timepoints (p<0.05). Symptoms not associated with tolerability were nail loss, acne, hair loss, and rash (p>0.05). Additionally, the total number of low-grade (mild to moderate) symptoms a patient experienced during study treatment was significantly correlated to poor tolerability (p<0.00001). Among patients with CTCAE data, 9% had adrenal insufficiency, and higher GP5 was found across all study timepoints in those with (compared to without) adrenal insufficiency (mean GP5 = [1.7-1.9] vs [1.3-1.5] respectively). Similarly, among patients with neuropathy (14%), higher GP5 scores were reported across all study timepoints (mean GP5 = [1.8-2.3] vs [1.3-1.5] respectively). Higher GP5 scores during treatment were correlated with higher fatigue scores at PS and FU1 (p<0.02 and p<0.001) and lower physical functioning at PS (p<0.01). Conclusions: TheGP5 measure is associated with self-reported symptoms, higher grade adverse events and quality of life scores. Furthermore, greater accumulation of lower grade symptoms can lead to poor tolerability. The single measure GP5 composite score reflects multiple components of treatment toxicity.

10608 Background: Cancer is one of the most feared diseases. Multi-cancer early detection (MCED) tests have the potential to expand the number of cancers that are detected at earlier stages, which could result in better clinical outcomes. However, behavioral impacts based on MCED test results could affect the utility and value of these tests. Methods: Two independent data sources evaluated the impact of MCED test results on behavioral intentions and perceptions: a survey of the general population and PRO in an MCED clinical trial. A web-based, 30-minute survey of the US general population was used to ascertain attitudes toward a hypothetical MCED test. Eligible respondents were adults aged 40-80 years without a cancer diagnosis in the previous 5 years. The survey assessed the perceived value of negative results (ie, no cancer signal detected [NCSD]) and the projected impact on post-test behaviors. The prospective PATHFINDER study (NCT04241796) of adults aged ≥50 years who underwent MCED cancer screening included PRO assessments. Post-test assessments included: "I am feeling relieved about my test result" from the adapted MICRA and “How likely are you to follow your healthcare provider’s cancer screening recommendations.” The consistency of sentiment after an NCSD MCED result from the online survey and clinical study was assessed. Results: Of the 1073 online survey respondents, 53% were female, 77% White, 14% Black/African American, and 13% Hispanic. Mean age was 58 years. The most common anticipated emotional impacts were relief (84%), happiness (72%), and confidence (69%). Respondents (66-70%) reported they would expect less worry, fear, stress, and anxiety after an NCSD MCED result. The majority (73%) reported they would maintain or improve health behaviors after an NCSD result. NCSD results were projected to lead to an increase in health-related behaviors, including adherence to recommended cancer screening (98%; 68% increase, 30% maintain current level) and regular doctor visits (46%). Of the 6529 PATHFINDER study participants who received NCSD results, 64% were female, 92% White. Mean age was 63 years. 80% of participants (n = 4685/5865) with NCSD felt relief "sometimes" or "often" after their MCED test result. Over 95% of participants (n = 5637/5863) with NCSD indicated they were "likely" or "very likely" to adhere to cancer screening recommendations in the future. Conclusions: Results from a general population survey and a prospective clinical study indicate that an NCSD result may be associated with positive cancer screening intentions and other preventive healthcare behaviors. An NCSD result may also positively impact psychological and emotional health. While these findings suggest that an NCSD result may provide additional value beyond traditional clinical benefits associated with cancer screening, future research is needed to delineate the behavioral impact following MCED screening. Clinical trial information: NCT04241796 .

Abstract Background Delirium is a common complication of older people in hospitals, rehabilitation and long-term facilities. Objective To assess the worldwide use of validated delirium assessment tools and the presence of delirium management protocols. Design Secondary analysis of a worldwide one-day point prevalence study on World Delirium Awareness Day, 15 March 2023. Setting Cross-sectional online survey including hospitals, rehabilitation and long-term facilities. Methods Participating clinicians reported data on delirium, the presence of protocols, delirium assessments, delirium-awareness interventions, non-pharmacological and pharmacological interventions, and ward/unit-specific barriers. Results Data from 44 countries, 1664 wards/units and 36 048 patients were analysed. Validated delirium assessments were used in 66.7% (n = 1110) of wards/units, 18.6% (n = 310) used personal judgement or no assessment, and 10% (n = 166) used other assessment methods. A delirium management protocol was reported in 66.8% (n = 1094) of wards/units. The presence of protocols for delirium management varied across continents, ranging from 21.6% (on 21/97 wards/units) in Africa to 90.4% (235/260) in Australia, similar to the use of validated delirium assessments with 29.6% (29/98) in Africa to 93.5% (116/124) in North America. Wards/units with a delirium management protocol [n = 1094/1664, 66.8%] were more likely to use a validated delirium test than those without a protocol [odds ratio 6.97 (95% confidence interval 5.289–9.185)]. The presence of a delirium protocol increased the chances for valid delirium assessment and, likely, evidence-based interventions. Conclusion Wards/units that reported the presence of delirium management protocols had a higher probability of using validated delirium assessments tools to assess for delirium.

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the fourth most frequently diagnosed cancer and the second leading cause of cancer death in the United States. Management of disseminated metastatic CRC involves various active drugs, either in combination or as single agents. The choice of therapy is based on consideration of the goals of therapy, the type and timing of prior therapy, the mutational profile of the tumor, and the differing toxicity profiles of the constituent drugs. This manuscript summarizes the data supporting the systemic therapy options recommended for metastatic CRC in the NCCN Guidelines for Colon Cancer.

6006 Background: IMPT has unique biologic and physical properties compared with IMRT, limits radiation dose beyond the targeted tumor volumes, and is a novel de-intensification strategy for the management of head and neck tumors. This study was designed to compare the outcomes for patients with OPC after chemoradiation therapy (CRT) with IMRT vs IMPT. Methods: This is a multi-center, randomized, phase III non-inferiority OPC trial Stage III/IV (AJCC 7th) squamous cell carcinoma stratified patients by human papillomavirus status, smoking status, and receipt of induction chemotherapy (IC). The primary endpoint was the rate of progression-free survival (PFS) rate at 3 years, where progression was defined as disease recurrence or death. Under the null hypothesis, H0: r ≥ 1.535 established the margin for non-inferiority of IMPT. Secondary endpoints include overall survival (OS), treatment-related malnutrition, and gastrostomy-tube dependence. Analyses were conducted on intent-to-treat (ITT; n=440), per-protocol (PP; n=296), and as-treated (AT; n=397) populations. Results: Patients (n=440) were randomized to undergo IMRT(n=219) or IMPT (n=221) at 21 institutions. The median age was 61 years and HPV/p16 was positive in 95%. IC was the initial treatment in 13% of patients. All patients were treated with CRT to 70 Gy in 33 fx with bilateral neck treatment, and post-CRT surgical lymph node dissection occurred in 8%. The median follow-up was 3.14 years. In the ITT analysis, the hazard ratio (HR) for disease progression or death at 3 y was 0.87 (95%CI 0.56,1.35); p=0.006 and the corresponding HR for death (OS) was 0.63 (95%CI 0.36-1.10) suggesting a protective affect with IMPT. In PP analysis, the PFS HR was 0.85 (95%CI 0.52,1.38); p=0.009 and HR for death (OS) was 0.60 (95%CI 0.32-1.12). In the AT analysis, PFS HR was 0.88 (95%CI 0.56,1.37); p=0.007 and the corresponding HR for death (OS) was 0.70 (95%CI 0.40-1.22). For each analysis above, the null hypothesis was rejected and IMPT was non-inferior to IMRT. PP gastrostomy-tube dependence decreased with IMPT vs. IMRT from 42% to 28% (p=0.019), and more IMPT patients sustained their nutrition with end of treatment weight loss < 5% from baseline: 24% vs 14% (p=0.037). Conclusions: IMPT is non-inferior to IMRT and has emerged as a standard of care CRT approach for OPC that reduces malnutrition and gastrostomy-tube dependence. Clinical trial information: NCT01893307 .