End-of-Life Care and Advanced Directives in Hispanic/Latinx Patients: Challenges and Solutions for the Practicing Oncologist.

Advanced end-of-life care (EOL) comprises a group of strategies to provide comfort to patients at the end of life. These are associated with better quality of life, better satisfaction, and a lower rate of hospitalizations and aggressive medical treatment. Advanced EOL care, including advanced directives completion and hospice enrollment, is suboptimal among Hispanic/Latinx patients with cancer due to personal, socio-cultural, financial, and health system-related barriers, as well as due to a lack of studies specifically designed for this population. In addition, the extrapolation of programs that increase participation in EOL for non-white Hispanics may not work appropriately for Hispanic/Latinx patients and lead to overall lower satisfaction and enrollment in EOL care. This review will provide the practicing oncologist with the tools to address EOL in the Hispanic/Latinx population. Some promising strategies to address the EOL care disparities in Latinx/Hispanic patients have been culturally tailored patient navigation programs, geriatric assessment-guided multidisciplinary interventions, counseling sessions, and educational interventions. Through these strategies, we encourage oncologists to take advantage of every clinical setting to discuss EOL care. Treating physicians can engage family members in caring for their loved ones while practicing cultural humility and respecting cultural preferences, incorporating policies to foster treatment for the underserved migrant population, and providing patients with validated Spanish language tools.

Disparities in lung cancer.

Lung cancer is the second most common cancer and the leading cause of cancer death among men and women in the United States. Despite a substantial decline in lung cancer incidence and mortality across all races in the last few decades, medically underserved racial and ethnic minority populations continue to carry the greatest burden of disease throughout the lung cancer continuum. Black individuals experience a higher incidence of lung cancer due to lower rates of low-dose computed tomography screening, which translate into advanced disease stage at diagnosis and poorer survival outcomes compared with White individuals. With respect to treatment, Black patients are less likely to receive gold standard surgery, have access to biomarker testing or high-quality treatment compared with White patients. The reasons for those disparities are multifactorial and include socioeconomic (eg, poverty, lack of health insurance, and inadequate education), and geographic inequalities. The objective of this article is to review the sources of racial and ethnic disparities in lung cancer, and to propose recommendations to help address them.

Racial Disparities in COVID-19 Outcomes Among Black and White Patients With Cancer.

Importance: Non-Hispanic Black individuals experience a higher burden of COVID-19 than the general population; hence, there is an urgent need to characterize the unique clinical course and outcomes of COVID-19 in Black patients with cancer. Objective: To investigate racial disparities in severity of COVID-19 presentation, clinical complications, and outcomes between Black patients and non-Hispanic White patients with cancer and COVID-19. Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective cohort study used data from the COVID-19 and Cancer Consortium registry from March 17, 2020, to November 18, 2020, to examine the clinical characteristics and outcomes of COVID-19 in Black patients with cancer. Data analysis was performed from December 2020 to February 2021. Exposures: Black and White race recorded in patient's electronic health record. Main Outcomes and Measures: An a priori 5-level ordinal scale including hospitalization intensive care unit admission, mechanical ventilation, and all-cause death. Results: Among 3506 included patients (1768 women [50%]; median [IQR] age, 67 [58-77] years), 1068 (30%) were Black and 2438 (70%) were White. Black patients had higher rates of preexisting comorbidities compared with White patients, including obesity (480 Black patients [45%] vs 925 White patients [38%]), diabetes (411 Black patients [38%] vs 574 White patients [24%]), and kidney disease (248 Black patients [23%] vs 392 White patients [16%]). Despite the similar distribution of cancer type, cancer status, and anticancer therapy at the time of COVID-19 diagnosis, Black patients presented with worse illness and had significantly worse COVID-19 severity (unweighted odds ratio, 1.34 [95% CI, 1.15-1.58]; weighted odds ratio, 1.21 [95% CI, 1.11-1.33]). Conclusions and Relevance: These findings suggest that Black patients with cancer experience worse COVID-19 outcomes compared with White patients. Understanding and addressing racial inequities within the causal framework of structural racism is essential to reduce the disproportionate burden of diseases, such as COVID-19 and cancer, in Black patients.

HOLA COVID-19 Study: Evaluating the Impact of Caring for Patients With COVID-19 on Cancer Care Delivery in Latin America.

PURPOSE: The HOLA COVID-19 study sought to evaluate the impact of COVID-19 on oncology practices across Latin America (LATAM), challenges faced by physicians, and how practices and physicians adapted while delivering care to patients with cancer. METHODS: This international cross-sectional study of oncology physicians in LATAM included a 43-item anonymous online survey to evaluate changes and adaptations to clinical practice. Multivariable logistic regression analyses were used to evaluate the association of caring for patients with COVID-19 and changes to clinical practice. RESULTS: A total of 704 oncology physicians from 19 countries completed the survey. Among respondents, the most common specialty was general oncology (34%) and 56% of physicians had cared for patients with COVID-19. The majority of physicians (70%) noted a decrease in the number of new patients evaluated during the COVID-19 pandemic when compared with prepandemic, and 73% reported adopting the use of telemedicine in their practice. More than half (58%) of physicians reported making changes to the treatments that they offered to patients with cancer. In adjusted models, physicians who had cared for patients with COVID-19 had higher odds of changing the type of chemotherapy or treatments that they offered (adjusted odds ratio 1.81; 95% CI, 1.30 to 2.53) and of delaying chemotherapy start (adjusted odds ratio 2.05; 95% CI, 1.49 to 2.81). Physicians identified significant delays in access to radiation and surgical services, diagnostic tests, and supportive care. CONCLUSION: The COVID-19 pandemic has significantly disrupted global cancer care. Although changes to health care delivery are a necessary response to this global crisis, our study highlights the significant disruption and changes to the treatment plans of patients with cancer in LATAM resulting from the COVID-19 health care crisis.

Assessment of Regional Variability in COVID-19 Outcomes Among Patients With Cancer in the United States.

Importance: The COVID-19 pandemic has had a distinct spatiotemporal pattern in the United States. Patients with cancer are at higher risk of severe complications from COVID-19, but it is not well known whether COVID-19 outcomes in this patient population were associated with geography. Objective: To quantify spatiotemporal variation in COVID-19 outcomes among patients with cancer. Design, Setting, and Participants: This registry-based retrospective cohort study included patients with a historical diagnosis of invasive malignant neoplasm and laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection between March and November 2020. Data were collected from cancer care delivery centers in the United States. Exposures: Patient residence was categorized into 9 US census divisions. Cancer center characteristics included academic or community classification, rural-urban continuum code (RUCC), and social vulnerability index. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was 30-day all-cause mortality. The secondary composite outcome consisted of receipt of mechanical ventilation, intensive care unit admission, and all-cause death. Multilevel mixed-effects models estimated associations of center-level and census division-level exposures with outcomes after adjustment for patient-level risk factors and quantified variation in adjusted outcomes across centers, census divisions, and calendar time. Results: Data for 4749 patients (median [IQR] age, 66 [56-76] years; 2439 [51.4%] female individuals, 1079 [22.7%] non-Hispanic Black individuals, and 690 [14.5%] Hispanic individuals) were reported from 83 centers in the Northeast (1564 patients [32.9%]), Midwest (1638 [34.5%]), South (894 [18.8%]), and West (653 [13.8%]). After adjustment for patient characteristics, including month of COVID-19 diagnosis, estimated 30-day mortality rates ranged from 5.2% to 26.6% across centers. Patients from centers located in metropolitan areas with population less than 250 000 (RUCC 3) had lower odds of 30-day mortality compared with patients from centers in metropolitan areas with population at least 1 million (RUCC 1) (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 0.31; 95% CI, 0.11-0.84). The type of center was not significantly associated with primary or secondary outcomes. There were no statistically significant differences in outcome rates across the 9 census divisions, but adjusted mortality rates significantly improved over time (eg, September to November vs March to May: aOR, 0.32; 95% CI, 0.17-0.58). Conclusions and Relevance: In this registry-based cohort study, significant differences in COVID-19 outcomes across US census divisions were not observed. However, substantial heterogeneity in COVID-19 outcomes across cancer care delivery centers was found. Attention to implementing standardized guidelines for the care of patients with cancer and COVID-19 could improve outcomes for these vulnerable patients.

COVID-19 and Cancer: A Review of the Registry-Based Pandemic Response.

Importance: The COVID-19 pandemic has had consequences for patients with cancer worldwide and has been associated with delays in diagnosis, interruption of treatment and follow-up care, and increases in overall infection rates and premature mortality. Observations: Despite the challenges experienced during the pandemic, the global oncology community has responded with an unprecedented level of investigation, collaboration, and technological innovation through the rapid development of COVID-19 registries that have allowed an increased understanding of the natural history, risk factors, and outcomes of patients with cancer who are diagnosed with COVID-19. This review describes 14 major registries comprising more than 28 500 patients with cancer and COVID-19; these ongoing registry efforts have provided an improved understanding of the impact and outcomes of COVID-19 among patients with cancer. Conclusions and Relevance: An initiative is needed to promote active collaboration between different registries to improve the quality and consistency of information. Well-designed prospective and randomized clinical trials are needed to collect high-level evidence to guide long-term epidemiologic, behavioral, and clinical decision-making for this and future pandemics.

Work Patterns of Women Physicians During Vacation: A Cross-Sectional Study.

Background: Burnout and poor work-life integration (WLI) are prevalent among women physicians. Vacation may help alleviate burnout and improve WLI but working while on vacation may negate these potential benefits. Little is known about the work patterns of women physicians on vacation, and we attempted to further characterize it in this study. Methods: In this online cross-sectional study of 498 members of the Physician Women in Leadership Facebook Group, we collected demographic information, information regarding burnout/WLI, self-reported work patterns while on vacation, and perceived impact of working during vacation on burnout/WLI. We also asked about the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on these behaviors. Results: At baseline, 37.5% of respondents reported burnout and 58.4% reported lack of satisfaction with WLI. About 94.4% of respondents reported engaging in some level of work-related behavior while on vacation (primarily answering work-related emails and participating in work-related meetings), but 73.3% reported that such engagement was detrimental to their mental health and WLI. About 66.3% reported an increase in at least one work-related behavior on vacation during the COVID-19 pandemic. Respondents identified and/or endorsed multiple strategies to reduce work-related engagement on vacation, many involving good modeling by leadership and/or national associations. Conclusions: Engagement in work-related behavior while on vacation is almost universal among women physicians, but most feel that it has negative effects on mental health and WLI. Strategies to encourage reduced engagement should be developed/strengthened and endorsed/modeled by those in leadership.

Videoconferencing Etiquette: Promoting Gender Equity During Virtual Meetings.

Considerable evidence has demonstrated that gender influences interactions during in-person meetings, most commonly, negatively impacting women and persons of color. Pervasive gender stereotypes about roles that were (and are) occupied by men and women lead to implicit assumptions about competency in said roles. For example, women may receive more negative verbal interruptions or nonverbal cues that undermine their authority as a leader, a stereotypically male-typed role. The coronavirus pandemic has led to the rapid rise in videoconferencing in professional interactions; however, little is known about videoconferencing etiquette and how gender bias permeates to this new setting. Although there are many benefits to the use of this technology, it has the potential to reinforce gender bias rooted in cultural and societal norms, gender stereotypes, and traditional gender roles. The well-documented implicit biases that have been shown to favor men over women during in-person meetings may translate to further gender gaps in leadership during virtual meetings. It is also possible that videoconferencing could be used to reduce gender bias, but until we have research to shine a light on this topic, this article provides 10 tips for promoting gender equity during virtual meetings.

The HOLA COVID-19 Study: An International Effort to Determine How COVID-19 Has Impacted Oncology Practices in Latin America.

Countries in Latin America and the Caribbean have become hotspots of the novel coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic, exacerbating socioeconomic inequalities and overwhelming fragmented health systems. Studies from the United States and Europe have highlighted the disproportionate effects of COVID-19 on patients with cancer and the disruption it has caused on cancer care delivery. The HOLA COVID-19 Study aims to understand how cancer care in Latin American countries has been affected by the COVID-19 pandemic.