Ridgeway, Jennifer L.

Abstract Purpose: Among a Latina population in a low resource healthcare setting, to test the effectiveness of bilingual (Spanish/English) written and interpersonal educational interventions in increasing breast density (BD) awareness, knowledge, and conversations with healthcare providers, which are goals of BD notification mandates. Procedures: This randomized trial was conducted at a Federally Qualified Health Center (FQHC) in an urban community of the Southwest U.S. Women ages 40- 74 presenting for screening mammography were recruited and randomized 1:1:1 to usual care (mailed letter with mammogram and BD results), enhanced care (letter plus BD educational brochure), or interpersonal care (letter, brochure, and telephonic promotora education). The baseline survey was administered in person at enrollment prior to the mammogram. Follow-up surveys were by phone or mail after the mammography results letter was mailed and promotora delivery was complete (median days from baseline to follow-up survey = 97 days). Differences between groups at baseline or follow-up were assessed with chi-square tests. Logistic regression using generalized estimating equations to account for repeated data was used to assess differences by time (baseline to follow-up) within group, including a time-by-group interaction. Results: Between October 2016 and October 2019, 1377 women were enrolled. Of these, 1085 (79%) self-identified Latinas completed baseline and follow-up surveys. Median age was 47 years. Most (91%) reported speaking mostly Spanish, and 69.1% had less than a high school degree. At baseline, only 20.9% reported having heard of BD, and only 30.5% of those knew their personal BD category. At follow-up, women in the interpersonal group were more likely to report seeing their BD results in the notification letter compared to the usual care and enhanced groups (70.4% vs. 52.9% and 54.3%, p < 0.001) and to report having spoken with a provider about their BD (27.3% vs. 14.2% and 15.7%, p < 0.001). They also reported higher mean understanding of BD (7.7 on a 0-10 scale vs. 6.3 and 6.6, p < 0.001). There were no significant differences on these outcomes between the usual care and enhanced groups. All groups saw significant improvement in correct responses from baseline to follow-up for questions on the ability of BD to mask tumors on a mammogram and BD as a breast cancer risk factor (p < 0.001 all groups), but the degree of improvement in masking knowledge was significantly higher for the interpersonal vs usual care group [OR for a correct response in follow-up vs baseline: 6.4 (interpersonal) vs 3.7 (usual care), p=0.01]. Conclusion: Among a Latina population in a FQHC, telephonic promotora education was more effective than written notification alone or a mailed brochure on key goals of notification mandates. Adding a brochure does not appear to be more effective than sending a letter alone on key outcomes, but the interpersonal nature of promotora education may prompt attention to mailed information and provide an opportunity for questions. Citation Format: Jennifer L. Ridgeway, Sarah M. Jenkins, Deborah J. Rhodes, Bhavika K. Patel, Edna Ramos, Bijan Borah, Karthik Ghosh, Vera J. Suman, Aaron Norman, Davinder Singh, Celine M. Vachon. Evaluating educational interventions to increase breast density awareness among Latinas: A randomized clinical trial in a Federally Qualified Health Center [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the AACR Virtual Conference: Thirteenth AACR Conference on the Science of Cancer Health Disparities in Racial/Ethnic Minorities and the Medically Underserved; 2020 Oct 2-4. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2020;29(12 Suppl):Abstract nr PO-245.

Abstract Objective: Breast density notification laws aim to increase women’s awareness and knowledge about breast density (BD). This study’s aim was to compare BD knowledge and awareness in two Hispanic populations: a safety-net clinic serving Latina population in Maricopa County, Arizona (AZ) and a national sample of Hispanic women participating in an online research panel. Materials/Methods: Women ages 40-74 were recruited at the AZ clinic from 2016-2019 at a screening mammography appointment as part of a larger clinical trial (AZ cohort). Surveys were completed in person (English or Spanish) at enrollment to assess awareness of BD, understanding of BD risk, and mammography history. The same questions were asked in a nationally representative online panel survey conducted in 2017. All data from the national survey were weighted to adjust for probability of selection into the panel and post-stratified to match known U.S. Hispanic population distributions (NS cohort). Univariate comparisons between the clinic and the national panel were performed using Rao-Scott chi-square tests. Associations with awareness and correct knowledge were examined with multivariable logistic regression. All summaries and analyses are weighted, and were performed with SAS version 9.4 SURVEY procedures (SAS Institute Inc., Cary, NC). Results: The analysis included 1332 Hispanic women from the AZ clinic and 152 Hispanic women who completed the national survey. The AZ cohort was younger (mean age: 48.5 vs 52.8), had less education (less than high school: 68.7% vs 34.8% less than high school), more likely to prefer Spanish (92.3% vs 53.1%) and less likely to have had a prior mammogram as compared NS cohort (82.8% vs 90.4%) (all p≤ 0.03). NS cohort was more likely to have awareness of BD (32.6% vs 20.7%); correct understanding of the masking effect of BD, (67.8% vs 37.0%,) and breast cancer risk (72.2% vs 32.6%,), compared to the AZ cohort (all p < 0.004). When adjusted for differences in education, age, language, and screening mammography history, BD awareness was similar between the two cohorts (adjusted odds ratio [ORadj] 0.95, p=0.83). Awareness was positively associated with more education, previous mammogram history, and English language. However, differences in BD knowledge remained (ORadj=2.8 [p=0.03] and 7.2 [P<0.001] for knowledge of masking and risk, respectively). Conclusions: There were significant differences in BD awareness and knowledge between a nationally-representative sample of Latinas and Latinas in a low-resource setting. The differences in BD awareness, but not knowledge, could be explained by education, screening history and preferred language. These findings suggest that a one-size-fits-all approach to raising BD awareness and knowledge will not work. To ensure equitable dissemination of health care to Latina women undergoing screening mammography, future work should be aimed at developing effective tools and resources for educating Spanish-speaking women about BD and risk-based screening. Citation Format: Jillian Leaver, Bhavika K. Patel, Jennifer L. Ridgeway, Sarah Jenkins, Vera Suman, Deborah J. Rhodes, Aaron Norman, Karthik Ghosh, Bijan Borah, Carrie Hruska, Edna Ramos, Davinder Singh, Matt Jewett, Carmen Radecki-Breitkof, Celine Vachon. Breast density knowledge and awareness among Latinas in a low-resource setting: A comparison nationally-representative sample of Latinas [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the AACR Virtual Conference: Thirteenth AACR Conference on the Science of Cancer Health Disparities in Racial/Ethnic Minorities and the Medically Underserved; 2020 Oct 2-4. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2020;29(12 Suppl):Abstract nr PO-238.

Objective: To determine intervention needs and to gather stakeholder input regarding healthy eating promotion for youth members served at a Boys & Girls Club in Rochester, Minnesota. Design: Mixed-methods design informed by community-based participatory research principles. Setting and Method: Young people completed a dietary habits questionnaire and height and weight measure-ments. Focus groups gathered stakeholder – Boys & Girls Club members, staff, caregivers – perspectives on opportunities to improve children’s healthy eating through the club setting. Content analysis identified major themes in informants’ accounts. Results: Participants identified individual and environmental barriers to healthy eating and opportunities to reduce barriers at this Boys & Girls Club site. Few children met basic nutritional guidelines related to fruit, vegetable, milk and water consumption, and limiting consumption of sugar-sweetened beverages, and nearly half were overweight/obese. Stakeholders expressed interest in healthy eating promotion and identified multiple individual-level, interpersonal and environmental opportunities to promote healthier eating through the Boys & Girls Club site. Conclusion: Findings build on a growing literature indicating afterschool programmes are uniquely positioned to address health disparities related to paediatric nutrition and obesity, and can be used to inform the design of a multi-layered intervention to address the complexities influencing dietary quality and obesity among diverse and underserved youth.

Objective: This study sought to understand the patients’ perspective of what contributes to an absence of discussions of sexual orientation (SO), gender identity (GI), and sexual health in cancer care. Methods: Patients were recruited from oncology, gynecology, and a gender transition clinic to participate in semistructured interviews, which were analyzed with qualitative methods. Results: A total of 25 patients were interviewed, shedding light on 2 themes. The first was that these conversations are important but infrequent. One patient explained, “…. we know people who have had sex changes…[they] would have appreciated that question.” In response to whether sexual health was ever brought up, one patient responded, “No doctor ever has.” Patients described unaddressed issues: “There have been times, you know, we’ve wondered if it was okay to make love.” The second theme consisted of 4 pragmatic, patient-provided points to facilitate discussions: (1) implementation of a scale of 1 to 10 (with 10 being comfortable) to first gauge patients’ comfort in talking about SO, GI, and sexual health; (2) having the health-care provider explore the topic again over-time; (3) making sure the health-care provider is comfortable, as such comfort appears to enhance the patient’s comfort (“I have a doctor here, a female doctor, who just matter of fact will ask if I get erections and so on because of the medication she’s giving me);” and (4) eliminating euphemisms (one patient stated, “I don’t know what you mean by ‘sexual health’.”). Conclusion: Oncology health-care providers have a unique opportunity and responsibility to address SO, GI, and sexual health.

AbstractAlthough endometrial cancer is often diagnosed at an early curable stage, the incidence and mortality from endometrial cancer is rising and minority women are particularly at risk. We hypothesize that delays in clinical presentation contribute to racial disparities in endometrial cancer mortality and treatment-related morbidity. Improved methods for endometrial cancer risk assessment and distinguishing abnormal uterine bleeding and postmenopausal bleeding from physiologic variation are needed. Accordingly, we propose a multipronged strategy that combines innovative patient education with novel early detection strategies to reduce health impacts of endometrial cancer and its precursors, especially among Black women. Futuristic approaches using gamification, smartphone apps, artificial intelligence, and health promotion outside of the physical clinic hold promise in preventing endometrial cancer and reducing morbidity and mortality related to the disease, but they also raise a number of questions that will need to be addressed by future research.

While genetic research (GR) is fueling discoveries in fields like precision medicine, there is a growing concern that underrepresentation of racial and ethnic populations in GR will limit access to its benefits and subsequently worsen health disparities. This study aimed to understand GR perceptions among members from underrepresented communities by studying discourse and language use in focus group discussions. Nine focus groups were conducted with adults from three populations: African American, Hispanic/Latino, and Native American; 53 women and 15 men participated. Data were analyzed using methods of discourse and content analysis. Discourse analysis highlighted how conceptualization of science and family—rooted in historical experiences—can influence views on GR risks and benefits to self and others. The use of focus group discourse in particular provided an opportunity for group sense making around the science and ethics of GR. Content analysis highlighted differences between the language use of focus group moderators, who spoke about scientific discovery and research oversight, and that of participants, whose talk highlighted ancestral bloodline, personal risk, and ethical concerns. The findings can inform efforts to bolster GR participation, including recruitment and educational campaigns. However, they also challenge researchers to consider areas of discordance between their own and community members’ conceptualization of the risks and benefits of GR participation, including the notion of future and family benefit.

Background: Although national organizations advocate that health-care providers ask patients about sexual health and sexual and gender minority status—to learn, for example, about side effects of treatment and to understand patients’ social support—these conversations often do not occur. This study explored health-care providers’ reasons for having/not having these conversations. Methods: This single-institution study recruited health-care providers from medical oncology, hematology, radiation oncology, and gynecology. Face-to-face interviews were recorded, transcribed, and analyzed qualitatively. Results: Three main themes emerged: (1) patient-centric reasons for discussing/not discussing sexual health and sexual and gender minority status (“So I think just the holistic viewpoint is important”); (2) health-care provider–centric reasons for discussing/not discussing these issues (“That’s going to take more time to talk about and to deal with…” or “I was raised orthodox, so this is not something we talk about…”; and (3) reasons that appeared to straddle both of the above themes (eg, acknowledgment of the sometimes taboo nature of these topics). Conclusion: Although many health-care providers favor talking with patients with cancer about sexual health and sexual and gender minority status, limited time, personal reluctance, and the taboo nature of these topics appear at times to hamper the initiation of these conversations.