Durani, Urshila

AbstractThe number of non‐Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) survivors is increasing. With the advancement of NHL therapies, it is crucial to focus on the challenges these survivors may face. Three main categories are to be considered in NHL survivorship, including quality of life and uncertainty about the future, possible physical health complications (including cardiovascular disease, infertility, and subsequent neoplasms), and the impact of novel NHL treatments and their potential complications. The latter includes CAR T‐cell therapy, monoclonal antibodies, checkpoint inhibitors, and hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. In this report, we aim to shed the light on these aspects and to discuss survivorship care plan for NHL.

AbstractIn the POLARIX trial, pola‐R‐CHP demonstrated improved progression‐free survival (PFS) compared to R‐CHOP in untreated intermediate‐ to high‐risk DLBCL. We surveyed practicing clinicians regarding their interpretation of POLARIX, including impressions of efficacy, safety, and cost. Of 174 respondents, most from academic centers (82%) in the United States (57%), 70% stated they would not replace R‐CHOP with pola‐R‐CHP due to insufficient PFS difference, lack of overall survival benefit, and excessive cost. Respondents not recommending pola‐R‐CHP expressed concerns about financial implications for both society and patients. We observed considerable heterogeneity in both study interpretation and plans for real‐world implementation of pola‐R‐CHP.

Abstract Background: Medical financial hardship, encompassing material, behavioral, and psychologic domains, is becoming an increasingly common consequence of illness in cancer patients. Identifying at-risk patients is the first step to develop proactive approaches to mitigate this problem. To try and address this need, Mayo Clinic Breast Disease Registry (MCBDR) is prospectively collecting data about financial concerns in addition to the usual sociodemographic and clinical information. Methods: We used data from Mayo Clinic Breast Disease Registry, a prospective cohort of consenting patients seen at Mayo Clinic Rochester within one year of initial breast cancer diagnosis. Participants completed baseline and annual follow-up surveys rating their financial concerns on a linear analogue scale from 0 (“none”) to 10 (“constant concerns”). We compared patient-reported financial concern at baseline to that on each patient’s most recent survey, with worsening concerns defined as a 1+-point increase. Logistic regression evaluated for predictors of worsening financial concerns. Results: 1,957 participants responded to financial concern questions on a baseline and at least one follow-up survey between 2015 and 2020. Mean age was 58.5 years (SD 12.5), and mean time between diagnosis and the most recent follow-up was 25.6 months (SD 16.2). 357 (18.2%) reported worsening financial concerns. Only lower baseline financial status was associated with a greater likelihood of worsening financial concerns (see Table). Conclusions: More than one in seven breast cancer survivors develop worsening financial concerns within 5-years of diagnosis, and those with less financial security at baseline appear to be most vulnerable. Funding: Breast Cancer Research Foundation (CLL) and NR015259 (KJR). Patient and tumor characteristics, compared by whether financial status worsened over time Full Cohort (n=1957) Worsening, ≥ 1-point change (n=357) Stable/Improved (n=1600) p value Full Cohort (n=1957) Worsening, ≥ 1-point change (n=357) Stable/Improved (n=1600) p value Age at diagnosis II or III 502 (25.7%) 98 (27.5%) 404 (25.3%) 0.239 ≤ 50 546 (27.9%) 105 (29.4%) 441 (27.6%) IV 67 (3.4%) 17 (4.8%) 50 (3.1%) 0.086 51-64 757 (38.7%) 136 (38.1%) 621 (38.8%) 0.562 Unknown 351 (17.9%) 65 (18.2%) 286 (17.9%) 0.536 ≥65 654 (33.4%) 116 (32.5%) 538 (33.6%) 0.506 ER and/or PR positive Race No/Unknown 482 (24.6%) 92 (25.8%) 390 (24.4%) White 1863 (95.2%) 337 (94.4%) 1526 (95.4%) Yes 1475 (75.4%) 265 (74.2%) 1210 (75.6%) 0.580 Non-white 24 (1.2%) 5 (1.4%) 19 (1.2%) 0.729 Her2 positive Other/Unknown/Choose not to respond 70 (3.6%) 15 (4.2%) 55 (3.4%) 0.478 No/Unknown 1746 (89.2%) 314 (88.0%) 1432 (89.5%) Educational status Yes 176 (9.0%) 37 (10.4%) 139 (8.7%) 0.321 Less than bachelor’s degree 880 (45.0%) 168 (47.1%) 712 (44.5%) Borderline 35 (1.8%) 6 (1.7%) 29 (1.8%) 0.898 Bachelor's degree or higher 1065 (54.4%) 187 (52.4%) 878 (54.9%) 0.384 Radiation Unknown 12 (0.6%) 2 (0.6%) 10 (0.6%) 0.832 No/Unknown 781 (39.9%) 140 (39.2%) 641 (40.1%) Financial status near time of diagnosis Yes 1176 (60.1%) 217 (60.8%) 959 (59.9%) 0.768 Pay bills, money for special things 1412 (72.2%) 244 (68.3%) 1168 (73.0%) Chemotherapy/targeted therapy Pay bills, no money for special things 367 (18.8%) 80 (22.4%) 287 (17.9%) 0.046 No/Unknown 1264 (64.6%) 221 (61.9%) 1043 (65.2%) Pay bills by making cuts 102 (5.2%) 19 (5.3%) 83 (5.2%) 0.729 Yes 693 (35.4%) 136 (38.1%) 557 (34.8%) 0.241 Unable to pay bills 56 (2.9%) 10 (2.8%) 46 (2.9%) 0.911 Hormone/endocrine therapy Unknown 20 (1.0%) 4 (1.1%) 16 (1.0%) 0.750 No/Unknown 710 (36.3%) 141 (39.5%) 569 (35.6%) Employment status at time of diagnosis Yes 1247 (63.7%) 216 (60.5%) 1031 (64.4%) 0.163 Employed full-time 462 (23.6%) 83 (23.2%) 379 (23.7%) Surgery type Employed part-time/unemployed/retired 525 (26.8%) 92 (25.8%) 433 (27.1%) 0.856 Lumpectomy 846 (43.2%) 145 (40.6%) 701 (43.8%) Not available 970 (49.6%) 182 (51.0%) 788 (49.3%) 0.716 Mastectomy 903 (46.1%) 165 (46.2%) 738 (46.1%) 0.535 Stage at time of diagnosis None/Unknown 208 (10.6%) 47 (13.2%) 161 (10.1%) 0.069 0 or I 1037 (53.0%) 177 (49.6%) 860 (53.8%) Citation Format: Michael H. Storandt, Urshila Durani, Daniela Stan, Nicole Larson, Charles Loprinzi, Fergus Couch, Janet E. Olson, Nandita Khera, Kathryn J. Ruddy. Financial hardship in breast cancer survivors [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2022; 2022 Apr 8-13. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2022;82(12_Suppl):Abstract nr 1012.

PURPOSE: The COVID-19 pandemic led to unprecedented challenges in medical training, and we sought to assess the specific impact of COVID-19 on hematology-oncology (HO) fellowship programs. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional anonymous online survey of 103 HO program directors (PDs) in conjunction with the American Society of Hematology (ASH) and ASCO. We sought to assess the specific impact of COVID-19 on HO fellowship programs' clinical, educational, and research activities, evaluate perceptions regarding PD and trainee emotional and mental health, and identify ways to support programs. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics, parametric and nonparametric tests, and multivariable logistic regression models. Responses to open-ended questions were analyzed with thematic analysis. RESULTS: Significant changes to fellowship activities included transitioning fellow training from outpatient clinics to telehealth (77.7%), shifting to virtual education (94.2%), and moving to remote research work (63.1%). A minority (21.4%) of PDs reported that their fellows were redeployed to cover non-HO services. Most PDs (54.4%) believed COVID-19 had a slight negative impact on fellowship training. PD self-reported burnout increased significantly from 15.5% prepandemic to 44.7% during the pandemic, and most PDs witnessed minor signs of fellow burnout (52.4%). Common PD concerns included inadequate supervision for telehealth activities, reduced opportunities for fellow advancement and promotion, lack of professional development activities, limited research operations and funding, program financial constraints, and virtual recruitment. CONCLUSION: We encourage institutions and national societies to allocate resources and develop programs that can support fellowships and mitigate the potential negative effects of COVID-19 on trainee and PD career development.

PURPOSE: Graduate medical and research training has drastically changed during the COVID-19 pandemic, with widespread implementation of virtual learning, redeployment from core rotations to the care of patients with COVID-19, and significant emotional and physical stressors. The specific experience of hematology-oncology (HO) fellows during the COVID-19 pandemic is not known. METHODS: We conducted a mixed-methods study using a survey of Likert-style and open-ended questions to assess the training experience and well-being of HO fellows, including both clinical and postdoctoral trainee members of the American Society of Hematology and ASCO. RESULTS: A total of 2,306 surveys were distributed by e-mail; 548 (23.8%) fellows completed the survey. Nearly 40% of fellows felt that they had not received adequate mental health support during the pandemic, and 22% reported new symptoms of burnout. Pre-existing burnout before the pandemic, COVID-19–related clinical work, and working in a primary research or nonclinical setting were associated with increased burnout on multivariable logistic regression. Qualitative thematic analysis of open-ended responses revealed significant concerns about employment after training completion, perceived variable quality of virtual education and board preparation, loss of clinical opportunities to prepare for independent clinical practice, inadequate grant funding opportunities in part because of shifting research priorities, variable productivity, and mental health or stress during the pandemic. CONCLUSION: HO fellows have been profoundly affected by the pandemic, and our data illustrate multiple avenues for fellowship programs and national organizations to support both clinical and postdoctoral trainees.