An orientation to the US National Cancer plan for the research community.

The US National Cancer Act of 1971 designated the director of the National Cancer Institute as responsible for coordinating federal agencies and nonfederal organizations to make progress against cancer. As part of her role, the immediate past director of the National Cancer Institute (MMB) led the development of a National Cancer Plan that was formally released on April 3, 2023. The plan includes 8 aspirational goals "to achieve a society where every person with cancer lives a full and active life and to prevent most cancers so that few people need to face this diagnosis." Research findings provide a foundation for each goal, and research gaps are included in the strategies for meeting each goal. The President's Cancer Panel, also created by the National Cancer Act, conducted an initial assessment of progress toward the plan goals by hearing from 12 organizations at a virtual public meeting on September 7, 2023. The purpose of this commentary is to orient the scientific community to the plan and call attention to related knowledge gaps that could benefit from research.

Mainstreaming in parallel with ovarian cancer tumor testing to improve genetic testing uptake.

OBJECTIVES: Although genetic testing (GT) is universally recommended for patients with epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC), rates are low (34%). In 1/2019, we implemented mainstreaming-GT in parallel with tumor testing via MSK-IMPACT within oncology clinics. We sought to determine GT rates pre/post-mainstreaming and patient characteristics associated with GT. METHODS: Patients with newly diagnosed EOC seen at our institution from 7/1/2015-3/31/2022 were included. Clinical data were abstracted including social determinants of health (SDOH) variables, race/ethnicity, marital status, insurance, language, comorbidities, employment, and Yost index, a measure of socioeconomic status. GT rates were calculated overall and pre-/post-mainstreaming (1/2019). Logistic regression models were fit to identify variables associated with GT. RESULTS: Of 1742 patients with EOC, 1591 (91%) underwent GT. Rates of GT increased from 87% to 95% after mainstreaming (p < 0.001). Among 151 patients not undergoing GT, major reasons were lack of provider recommendation (n = 76, 50%) and logistical issues (n = 38, 25%) with few declining (n = 14, 9%) or having medical complications preventing GT (n = 7, 4.6%). High-grade serous histology, advanced stage (III/IV), and having a spouse/partner were associated with increased GT uptake (p < 0.01). Among SDOH variables, there were no differences by insurance, Yost score, language, comorbidities, employment, or race/ethnicity. In multivariable models, likelihood of GT increased with mainstreaming, even after adjustment for histology, stage, and marital status (OR 3.77; 95% CI: 2.56-5.66). CONCLUSIONS: Mainstreaming increased the likelihood of GT in patients with EOC. We found lower testing rates in patients without partners/spouses, non-high-grade serous histology, and early-stage disease, representing potential areas for future interventions.

Germline Pathogenic Variants and Genetic Counseling by Ancestry in Patients With Epithelial Ovarian Cancer.

PURPOSE: To evaluate rates of germline pathogenic/likely pathogenic variants (PVs) and genetic counseling by ancestry in patients with epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC). METHODS: Patients with pathologically confirmed EOC who underwent clinical tumor-normal sequencing from January 1, 2015, to December 31, 2020, inclusive of germline analysis of ≥76 genes were included. Patients with newly identified PVs were referred for Clinical Genetics Service (CGS) counseling. Ancestry groups were defined using self-reported race/ethnicity and Ashkenazi Jewish (AJ) heritage. Genetic ancestry was inferred computationally using validated algorithms. Logistic regression models were built. RESULTS: Of 1,266 patients, self-reported ancestry (AJ, 17%; Asian, 10%; Black/African American, 5.4%; Hispanic, 6.2%; non-Hispanic White, 57%; other, 0.16%; unknown, 4.0%) correlated with genetic ancestry (AJ ancestry, 18%; admixed, 10%; African, 4%; East Asian [EAS], 6%; European, 56%; Native American, 0.2%; South Asian [SAS], 4%; unknown, 2%). Germline PVs were observed in 313 (25%) patients, including 195 (15%) with PVs in EOC-associated genes. Those with PVs were younger at diagnosis (59 v 62 years; P < .001) and more likely to have high-grade serous ovarian cancer (83% v 72%; P = .009). PV prevalence varied between ancestry groups (P < .001), with highest rates in the AJ (39.9%) and Asian (26.5%) groups and similar rates (>10%) across other ancestry groups. Use of genetic ancestry demonstrated similar findings and further characterized high rates of PV in EAS/SAS groups. Younger age, high-grade serous histology, and self-reported AJ or Asian ancestry were associated with PV in an EOC-associated gene. Rates of CGS counseling for newly identified PVs were high (80%) across ancestry groups. CONCLUSION: Rates of PV, particularly in EOC-associated genes, were high regardless of ancestry, with similar rates of counseling between groups, emphasizing the importance of universal genetic testing in all patients with EOC.

Molecular Characterization of Endometrial Carcinomas in Black and White Patients Reveals Disparate Drivers with Therapeutic Implications.

Although the incidence of endometrial carcinoma (EC) is similar in Black and White women, racial disparities are stark, with the highest mortality rates observed among Black patients. Here, analysis of 1,882 prospectively sequenced ECs using a clinical FDA-authorized tumor-normal panel revealed a significantly higher prevalence of high-risk histologic and molecular EC subtypes in self-identified Black (n = 259) compared with White (n = 1,623) patients. Clinically actionable alterations, including high tumor mutational burden/microsatellite instability, which confer benefit from immunotherapy, were less frequent in ECs from Black than from White patients. Ultramutated POLE molecular subtype ECs associated with favorable outcomes were rare in Black patients. Results were confirmed by genetic ancestry analysis. CCNE1 gene amplification, which is associated with aggressive clinical behavior, was more prevalent in carcinosarcomas occurring in Black than in White patients. ECs from Black and White patients display important differences in their histologic types, molecular subtypes, driver genetic alterations, and therapeutic targets. SIGNIFICANCE: Our comprehensive analysis of prospectively clinically sequenced ECs revealed significant differences in their histologic and molecular composition and in the presence of therapeutic targets in Black versus White patients. These findings emphasize the importance of incorporating diverse populations into molecular studies and clinical trials to address EC disparities. This article is featured in Selected Articles from This Issue, p. 2293.

Patient-reported symptoms after minimally invasive hysterectomy and association with postoperative complications.

OBJECTIVE: To describe patient-reported postoperative symptoms and to evaluate the use of digital symptom tracking and alerts to detect postoperative complications. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed patients who underwent a minimally invasive hysterectomy and enrolled in our Recovery Tracker program from 4/5/17-12/31/21. The Recovery Tracker is an at-home virtual tool used to track patient-reported postoperative symptoms for 10 days. Predefined thresholds for "red" and "yellow" alerts are based on symptom severity and timing. Data on patient demographics, surgery, and postoperative course were collected to evaluate the association of alerts with complications and compare outcomes of patients who did/did not enroll in the program. RESULTS: Of 2362 eligible patients, 1694 (71.7%) enrolled in the Recovery Tracker program. Pain was the most severe symptom, followed by fatigue. Eighty-seven patients experienced 102 complications (5.1% complication rate) and 32 experienced 39 grade ≥ 2 complications (1.9% severe complication rate). Excluding complications that occurred prior to Recovery Tracker use, 1673 patients experienced 28 grade ≥ 2 complications. Of 345 patients (20.6%) who triggered a red alert, 13 (3.8%) had a grade ≥ 2 complication. Of 1328 patients (79.4%) with no red alerts, 15 (1.13%) had a grade ≥ 2 complication. Relative risk of a grade ≥ 2 complication if a red alert was triggered was 3.25 (95% CI: 1.6-6.9, P = .002). Rate of severe complications was significantly higher among patients who did not use the tool (3.3% vs 1.9%; P = .04). CONCLUSIONS: The Recovery Tracker tool may assist in early identification of postoperative symptoms after minimally invasive hysterectomy.

Genetic Ancestry Correlates with Somatic Differences in a Real-World Clinical Cancer Sequencing Cohort.

Accurate ancestry inference is critical for identifying genetic contributors of cancer disparities among populations. Although methods to infer genetic ancestry have historically relied upon genome-wide markers, the adaptation to targeted clinical sequencing panels presents an opportunity to incorporate ancestry inference into routine diagnostic workflows. We show that global ancestral contributions and admixture of continental populations can be quantitatively inferred using markers captured by the MSK-IMPACT clinical panel. In a pan-cancer cohort of 45,157 patients, we observed differences by ancestry in the frequency of somatic alterations, recapitulating known associations and revealing novel associations. Despite the comparable overall prevalence of driver alterations by ancestry group, the proportion of patients with clinically actionable alterations was lower for African (30%) compared with European (33%) ancestry. Although this result is largely explained by population-specific cancer subtype differences, it reveals an inequity in the degree to which different populations are served by existing precision oncology interventions. SIGNIFICANCE: We performed a comprehensive analysis of ancestral associations with somatic mutations in a real-world pan-cancer cohort, including >5,000 non-European individuals. Using an FDA-authorized tumor sequencing panel and an FDA-recognized oncology knowledge base, we detected differences in the prevalence of clinically actionable alterations, potentially contributing to health care disparities affecting underrepresented populations. This article is highlighted in the In This Issue feature, p. 2483.

Disparities in cancer genetics care by race/ethnicity among pan-cancer patients with pathogenic germline variants.

BACKGROUND: Germline risk assessment is increasing as part of cancer care; however, disparities in subsequent genetic counseling are unknown. METHODS: Pan-cancer patients were prospectively consented to tumor-normal sequencing via custom next generation sequencing panel (Memorial Sloan Kettering-Integrated Mutation Profiling of Actionable Cancer Targets) inclusive of germline analysis of ≥76 genes from January 2015 through December 2019 (97.5% research nonbillable) with protocol for genetics referral. Rates of pathogenic/likely pathogenic germline variants (PVs) and downstream counseling were compared across ancestry groups (mutually exclusive groups based on self-reported race/ethnicity and Ashkenazi Jewish [AJ] heritage) using nonparametric tests and multivariable logistic regression models. RESULTS: Among 15,775 patients (59.6%, non-Hispanic [NH]-White; 15.7%, AJ; 20.5%, non-White [6.9%, Asian; 6.8%, Black/African American (AA); 6.7%, Hispanic; 0.1%, Other], and 4.2%, unknown), 2663 (17%) had a PV. Non-White patients had a lower PV rate (n = 433, 13.4%) compared to NH-Whites (n = 1451, 15.4%) and AJ patients (n = 683, 27.6%), p < .01, with differences in mostly moderate and low/recessive/uncertain penetrance variants. Among 2239 patients with new PV, 1652 (73.8%) completed recommended genetic counseling. Non-White patients had lower rates of genetic counseling (67.7%) than NH-White (73.7%) and AJ patients (78.8%), p < .01, with lower rates occurring in Black/AA (63%) compared to NH-White patients, even after adjustment for confounders (odds ratio, 0.60; 95% confidence interval, 0.37-0.97; p = .036). Non-White, particularly Black/AA and Asian, probands had a trend toward lower rates and numbers of at-risk family members being seen for counseling/genetic testing. CONCLUSIONS: Despite minimizing barriers to genetic testing, non-White patients were less likely to receive recommended cancer genetics follow-up, with potential implications for oncologic care, cancer risk reduction, and at-risk family members. LAY SUMMARY: Genetic testing is becoming an important part of cancer care, and we wanted to see if genetics care was different between individuals of different backgrounds. We studied 15,775 diverse patients with cancer who had genetic testing using a test called MSK-IMPACT that was covered by research funding. Clinically important genetic findings were high in all groups. However, Black patients were less likely to get recommended counseling compared to White patients. Even after removing many roadblocks, non-White and especially Black patients were less likely to get recommended genetics care, which may affect their cancer treatments and families.

Demographic shifts associated with implementation of evidence-based guidelines for ovarian conservation in patients with endometrioid endometrial cancer.

OBJECTIVE: In 2018, evidence-based surgical guidelines were introduced to identify appropriate patients with low-grade endometrioid endometrial cancer for ovarian conservation. We sought to identify trends and demographic shifts associated with guideline implementation. METHODS: We identified women treated for endometrioid endometrial cancer at our institution from January 2010 to June 2021. Eligibility criteria included age ≤50 years, normal-appearing ovaries on preoperative imaging, no family history of hereditary breast and ovarian cancer syndrome or Lynch syndrome, and no hormone receptor-positive malignancy. Trends in ovarian conservation were examined with the Cochran-Armitage trend test or in a logistic regression model. Associations between ovarian conservation and clinicodemographic factors before and after guideline implementation were compared using Wilcoxon rank-sum and Fisher's exact tests. RESULTS: Of 420 women ≤50 years of age undergoing surgery for endometrioid endometrial cancer, 355 (85%) met the criteria for ovarian conservation-267 (75%) before and 88 (25%) after guideline implementation. Median patient age was 45 years (range 25-50); 62% were non-Hispanic White, 10% Hispanic White, 8% non-Hispanic Black, 0% Hispanic Black, and 20% Asian. Patients were significantly more likely to choose ovarian conservation after (48%) compared with before guideline implementation (21%) (p<0.001). Pre-guidelines, non-Hispanic White women were less likely to elect for ovarian conservation (12%) compared with non-Hispanic Black, Asian, or Hispanic White women (28%) (p=0.002). Similarly, older women were less likely to elect for ovarian conservation compared with younger women (p<0.001). There were no differences by obesity (p=0.68), marital status (p=0.86), or insurance (p=0.89). Post-guidelines, there were no differences in ovarian conservation between non-Hispanic White women (36%) and non-Hispanic Black, Asian, or Hispanic White women (50%) (p=0.56). Older women were still less likely to elect for ovarian conservationcompared with younger women (p<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: After guideline implementation, ovarian conservation increased and uptake disparities across demographic groups decreased.

Gynecologic Survivorship Tool: Development, Implementation, and Symptom Outcomes.

PURPOSE: To describe the development and implementation of a new digital health clinical tool (Gynecologic Survivorship Tool [GST]) for symptom management of women surgically treated for gynecologic cancer; to assess its feasibility; and to conduct a retrospective review of the data. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The GST was developed on the basis of a comprehensive review of the literature, multidisciplinary expert opinion, and feedback from women with a history of gynecologic cancer. It is composed of 17 questions addressing six main categories-gynecologic health (abnormal bleeding/pain), lymphedema, vaginal/vulvar dryness, sexual health, menopause (hot flushes/sleep difficulties), and bowel/urinary issues. An electronic version using the Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center Engage platform was piloted in two clinics for patients with endometrial or cervical cancer. Health information was generated into clinical summaries and identified concerns for actionable response. Associations of symptom and survey time point were assessed by longitudinal models using generalized estimating equations. RESULTS: From January 1, 2019, to February 29, 2020, 3,357 GST assessments were assigned to 1,405 patients, with a 71% completion rate (90% within 5 minutes). Sixty-eight percent were performed at home via a patient portal, 32% at follow-ups using a clinic iPad. The most common symptoms were bowel problems, swelling/fluid, pain during examination, vaginal or vulvar dryness, and vaginal bleeding. Implementation challenges included improving patient compliance and ensuring that reports were reviewed by all clinical teams. We developed screening e-mails detailing patients whose assessments were due, planned training sessions for multidisciplinary teams, and incorporated feedback on methods for reviewing symptoms reports. CONCLUSION: The GST demonstrated feasibility, a high completion rate, and minimal time commitment. It was an effective electronic reporting mechanism for patients, enabling the medical team to develop specific strategies for alleviating bothersome symptoms during follow-up.

Patient-reported benefit from proposed interventions to reduce financial toxicity during cancer treatment.

INTRODUCTION: Financial toxicity is common and pervasive among cancer patients. Research suggests that gynecologic cancer patients experiencing financial toxicity are at increased risk for engaging in harmful cost-coping strategies, including delaying/skipping treatment because of costs, or forsaking basic needs to pay medical bills. However, little is known about patients' preferences for interventions to address financial toxicity. METHODS: Cross-sectional surveys to assess financial toxicity [Comprehensive Score for Financial Toxicity (COST)], cost-coping strategies, and preferences for intervention were conducted in a gynecologic cancer clinic waiting room. Associations with cost-coping were determined using multivariate modeling. Unadjusted odds ratios (ORs) explored associations between financial toxicity and intervention preferences. RESULTS: Among 89 respondents, median COST score was 31.9 (IQR: 21-38); 35% (N = 30) scored < 26, indicating they were experiencing financial toxicity. Financial toxicity was significantly associated with cost-coping (adjusted OR = 3.32 95% CI: 1.08, 14.34). Intervention preferences included access to transportation vouchers (38%), understanding treatment costs up-front (35%), minimizing wait times (33%), access to free food at appointments (25%), and assistance with minimizing/eliminating insurance deductibles (23%). In unadjusted analyses, respondents experiencing financial toxicity were more likely to select transportation assistance (OR = 2.67, 95% CI: 1.04, 6.90), assistance with co-pays (OR = 9.17, 95% CI: 2.60, 32.26), and assistance with deductibles (OR = 12.20, 95% CI: 3.47, 43.48), than respondents not experiencing financial toxicity. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings confirm the presence of financial toxicity in gynecologic cancer patients, describe how patients attempt to cope with financial hardship, and provide insight into patients' needs for targeted interventions to mitigate the harm of financial toxicity.

Risk factors for financial toxicity in patients with gynecologic cancer.

BACKGROUND: The cost of cancer care is high and rising. Evidence of increased patient cost burden is prevalent in the medical literature and has been defined as "financial toxicity," the financial hardship and financial concerns experienced by patients because of a disease and its related treatments. With targeted therapies and growing out-of-pocket costs, patient financial toxicity is a growing concern among patients with gynecologic cancer. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to determine the prevalence of financial toxicity and identify its risk factors in patients with gynecologic cancer treated at a large cancer center using objective data. STUDY DESIGN: Using institutional databases, we identified patients with gynecologic cancer treated from January 2016 to December 2018. Patients with a preinvasive disease were excluded. Financial toxicity was defined according to institutionally derived metrics as the presence of ≥1 of the following: ≥2 bills sent to collections, application or granting of a payment plan, settlement, bankruptcy, financial assistance program enrollment, or a finance-related social work visit. Clinical characteristics were gathered using a 2-year look-back from the time of the first financial toxicity event or a randomly selected treatment date for those not experiencing toxicity. Risk factors were assessed using chi-squared tests. All significant variables on univariate analysis were included in the logistic regression model. RESULTS: Of the 4655 patients included in the analysis, 1155 (25%) experienced financial toxicity. In the univariate analysis, cervical cancer (35%), stage 3 or 4 disease (24% and 30%, respectively), younger age (35% for age <30 years), nonpartnered marital status (31%), Black (45%) or Hispanic (37%) race and ethnicity, self-pay (48%) or commercial insurance (30%), clinical trial participation (31%), more imaging studies (39% for ≥9), ≥1 emergency department visit (36%), longer inpatient stays (36% for ≥20 days), and more outpatient clinician visits (41% for ≥20 visits) were significantly associated with financial toxicity (P<.01). In multivariate analysis, younger age, nonpartnered marital status, Black and Hispanic race and ethnicity, commercial insurance, more imaging studies, and more outpatient physician visits were significantly associated with financial toxicity. CONCLUSION: Financial toxicity is an increasing problem for patients with gynecologic cancer. Our analysis, using objective measures of financial toxicity, has suggested that demographic factors and healthcare utilization metrics may be used to proactively identify at-risk patients for financial toxicity.

Sexual harassment and gender discrimination in gynecologic oncology.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the prevalence of sexual harassment and perceptions of gender disparities affecting the careers of physicians in gynecologic oncology. METHODS: We conducted a survey of US physician members of the Society of Gynecologic Oncology. Participants were queried about demographics, sexual harassment experiences during training/practice, and perceptions of gender disparities in compensation and career advancement. Responses were categorized as "never" versus "ever" and compared using Fisher's exact test. RESULTS: The survey was sent to 1566 members-405 (255 females, 147 males, 3 other) responded (response rate 26%). Sixty-four percent reported having experienced sexual harassment during training/practice. Sexual harassment was experienced by 71% of females and 51% of males. Of these respondents, only 14.5% reported it. Reasons for not reporting included: "incident did not seem important enough" (40%); "did not think anything would be done about it" (37%); and "fear of reprisal" (34%). Female respondents were more likely to report gender affected their career advancement (34% vs. 10%; p ≤ .001) and compensation (64% vs. 19%; p ≤ .001); males were more likely to report no gender income disparity (91% vs. 57%; p ≤ .001). CONCLUSIONS: Sexual harassment during training/practice appears common among male and female gynecologic oncologists. Although most are aware of how to report an incident, few do so, mostly for fear of reprisal or concern nothing will be done. Despite practicing in a field defined by caring for women, female physicians more often perceive gender influences their compensation and career advancement. Awareness of these issues can lead to their elimination from our specialty.

Comparison of minimally invasive versus open surgery in the treatment of endometrial carcinosarcoma.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to compare perioperative and oncologic outcomes between minimally invasive and open surgery in the treatment of endometrial carcinosarcoma. METHODS: We retrospectively identified all patients with newly diagnosed endometrial carcinosarcoma who underwent primary surgery via any approach at our institution from January 2009 to January 2018. Patients with known bulky disease identified on preoperative imaging were excluded. The χ2 and Mann-Whitney U tests were used to compare categorical and continuous variables, respectively. Kaplan-Meier curves were used to estimate survival, and compared using the log rank test. RESULTS: We identified 147 eligible patients, of whom 37 (25%) underwent an open approach and 110 (75%) underwent minimally invasive surgery. Within the minimally invasive group, 92 (84%) of 110 patients underwent a robotic procedure and 14 (13%) underwent a laparoscopic procedure. Four minimally invasive cases (4%) were converted to open procedures. Median age, body mass index, operative time, stage, complication grade, and use of adjuvant treatment were clinically and statistically similar between groups. Median length of hospital stay in the open group was 4 days (range 3-21) compared with 1 day (range 0-6) in the minimally invasive group (p<0.001). The rates of any 30-day complication were 46% in the open and 8% in the minimally invasive group (p<0.001). The rates of grade 3 or higher complications were 5.4% and 1.8%, respectively (p=0.53). Median follow-up for the entire cohort was 30 months (range 0.4-121). Two-year progression-free survival rates were 52.8% (SE±8.4) in the open group and 58.5% (SE±5.1) in the minimally invasive group (p=0.7). Two-year disease-specific survival rates were 66.1% (SE±8.0) and 81.4% (SE±4.1), respectively (p=0.8). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with clinical stage I endometrial carcinosarcoma, minimally invasive compared with open surgery was not associated with poor oncologic outcomes, but with a shorter length of hospital stay and a lower rate of overall complications.

Robotic Surgery in the Frail Elderly: Analysis of Perioperative Outcomes.

PURPOSE: The frail are considered at higher risk for unfavorable surgical outcomes (major complications/mortality). We assessed the safety of and outcomes associated with robotic surgery in the frail elderly undergoing gynecologic procedures. METHODS: We identified patients aged ≥ 65 years who underwent a robotic procedure between May 2007 and December 2016. Frailty was defined as the presence of at least three of five frailty factors-more than five comorbidities, low physical activity, weight loss, exhaustion, and fatigue. Perioperative outcomes were recorded. We compared variables among frail and non-frail patients and performed a multivariate logistic regression to detect variables associated with major complications (≥ grade 3) or 90-day mortality. RESULTS: We identified 982 patients: 71 frail and 911 non-frail patients. Median age was 71 years. Median BMI was 29.8 kg/m2. Thirty-four patients (3.5%) had a 30-day readmission. Seventy-seven (7.8%) had a postoperative complication, of which 23 (2.3%) were major. Ninety-day mortality was 0.5%. There were significant differences with regard to age (P < 0.001), body mass index (BMI) (P < 0.001) and performance status (P < 0.001); the frail were more likely to have had surgery for oncologic reasons (P = 0.047). There were differences in hospital stay (P < 0.001), postoperative (P = 0.042) and major complications (P = 0.007), and 90-day mortality (P = 0.05). At multivariable logistic regression, age ≥ 85 was associated with major complications. BMI, performance status, and major complications were associated with 90-day mortality. CONCLUSIONS: The frail elderly have longer hospital stays and more complications after surgery than the general population, consistent with the reported literature. Careful selection of surgical candidates is required.

Evolution and outcomes of sentinel lymph node mapping in vulvar cancer.

OBJECTIVES: To characterize our institutional experience with sentinel lymph node (SLN) biopsy in patients with vulvar cancer. We describe the oncologic outcomes of these patients and the utilization of SLN detection techniques over time. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of all patients who underwent inguinofemoral SLN biopsy as part of their treatment for vulvar cancer at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center from January 1, 2000 to April 1, 2019. Patients were included in this analysis if they underwent inguinofemoral SLN biopsy for vulvar cancer, irrespective of presenting factors such as histology, tumor size or laterality. An "at-risk groin" was defined as either the right or left groin for which SLN biopsy of inguinofemoral lymph nodes was performed. RESULTS: A total of 160 patients were included in our analysis, representing 265 at-risk groins. 114 patients had squamous cell histology representing 195 at-risk groins. Of the 169 negative groins in patients with squamous cell carcinoma, the 2 year isolated groin recurrence rate was 1.2%. SLN detection rate, irrespective of modality, was 96.2%. Technetium-99 (TC-99) + blue dye detected SLNs in 91.8% of groins; TC-99 + indocyanine green detected SLNs in 100% of groins (p=0.157). Among the 110 groins that underwent mapping with TC-99 and blue dye, 4 patients had failed mapping with blue dye and mapped with TC-99 alone (3.6%). Among the 96 groins that underwent mapping with TC-99 and ICG, 14 patients failed to map with TC-99 and mapped with indocyanine green alone (14.6%). CONCLUSIONS: SLN mapping in vulvar cancer is reliable and oncologically effective. The utilization of indocyanine green for mapping has increased over the past decade and is associated with high rates of SLN detection.

Patient-reported outcomes after surgery for endometrial carcinoma: Prevalence of lower-extremity lymphedema after sentinel lymph node mapping versus lymphadenectomy.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the prevalence of patient-reported lower-extremity lymphedema (LEL) with sentinel lymph node (SLN) mapping versus comprehensive lymph node dissection (LND) for the surgical management of newly diagnosed endometrial carcinoma. METHODS: Patients who underwent primary surgery for endometrial cancer from 01/2006-12/2012 were mailed a survey that included a validated 13-item LEL screening questionnaire in 08/2016. Patients diagnosed with LEL prior to surgery and those who answered ≤6 survey items were excluded. RESULTS: Of 1275 potential participants, 623 (49%) responded to the survey and 599 were evaluable (180 SLN, 352 LND, 67 hysterectomy alone). Median BMI was similar among cohorts (P = 0.99). External-beam radiation therapy (EBRT) was used in 10/180 (5.5%) SLN and 35/352 (10%) LND patients (P = 0.1). Self-reported LEL prevalence was 27% (49/180) and 41% (144/352), respectively (OR, 1.85; 95% CI, 1.25-2.74; P = 0.002). LEL prevalence was 51% (23/45) in patients who received EBRT and 35% (170/487) in those who did not (OR, 1.95; 95% CI, 1.06-3.6; P = 0.03). High BMI was associated with increased prevalence of LEL (OR, 1.04; 95% CI, 1.02-1.06; P = 0.001). After controlling for EBRT and BMI, LND retained independent association with an increased prevalence of LEL over SLN (OR, 1.8; 95% CI, 1.22-2.69; P = 0.003). Patients with self-reported LEL had significantly worse QOL compared to those without self-reported LEL. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first study to assess patient-reported LEL after SLN mapping for endometrial cancer. SLN mapping was independently associated with a significantly lower prevalence of patient-reported LEL. High BMI and adjuvant EBRT were associated with an increased prevalence of patient-reported LEL.

Factors Associated With Use of a High-Volume Cancer Center by Black Women With Ovarian Cancer.

OBJECTIVE: Disparities exist between population subgroups in the use of gynecologic oncologists and high-volume hospitals. The objectives of this study were to explore the experiences of black women obtaining ovarian cancer (OC) care at a high-volume center (HVC) and to identify patient-, provider-, and systems-related factors affecting their access to and use of this level of care. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twenty-one semistructured interviews were conducted as part of an institutional review board-approved protocol with women who self-identified as black or African American, treated for OC at a single HVC from January 2013 to May 2017. Recurring themes were identified in transcribed interviews through the process of independent and collaborative thematic content analysis. RESULTS: Five themes were identified: (1) internal attributes contributing to black women's ability/desire to be treated at an HVC, (2) pathways to high- and low-volume centers, (3) obstacles to obtaining care, (4) potential barriers for black women interested in treatment at an HVC, and (5) suggestions for improving HVC use by black women. Study participants who successfully accessed care were comfortable navigating the health care system, understood the importance of self-advocacy, and valued the expertise of an HVC. Barriers to obtaining care at an HVC included lack of knowledge about the HVC, lack of referral, transportation difficulties, and lack of insurance coverage. CONCLUSION: In this qualitative study, black women treated at an HVC shared attributes and experiences that helped them access care. There is a need to collaborate with black communities and establish interventions to reduce barriers, facilitate access, and disseminate information about the value of receiving care for OC at an HVC.

Cancer Health Impact Program (CHIP): Identifying Social and Demographic Associations of mHealth Access and Cancer Screening Behaviors Among Brooklyn, New York, Residents.

BACKGROUND: The Bedford-Stuyvesant (BS) and Bushwick (BW) communities of central Brooklyn, New York, are located within the 50-mile core radius of Memorial Sloan Kettering's main catchment area. Cancer is the second leading cause of death among the predominantly African American and Hispanic neighborhoods, with BS and BW having higher prostate cancer and colorectal mortality rates than New York City as a whole. There is significant opportunity to design cancer interventions that leverage the accessibility and acceptability of mobile health (mHealth) tools among the BS and BW communities. METHODS: The Cancer Health Impact Program (CHIP) is a collaborative that was formed for this purpose. Through CHIP, we used a tablet-based, Health Information National Trends (HINTS)-based multimodality survey to collect and analyze social and demographic patterns of prostate cancer and colorectal cancer screening, as well as mHealth access, among BS and BW residents. RESULTS: Among 783 participants, 77% reported having a smartphone, 40% reported access to a mobile health application, 17% reported blood stool kit testing, and 26% of men reported PSA test screening. Multivariable logistic regression models results demonstrated that participants who reported owning smartphones, but were unsure whether they had access to a health app, were also significantly more likely to report blood stool kit testing compared with participants without smartphones. In fully adjusted models, access to a health app was not significantly associated with PSA testing. Non-Hispanic white participants were 86% less likely to report blood stool kit testing when compared with non-Hispanic black participants [OR = 0.15; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.02-0.49]. Participants with a prior history of cancer were three times more likely to report blood stool kit testing when compared with those without cancer history (OR = 3.18; 95% CI, 1.55-6.63). CONCLUSIONS: For blood stool kit testing, significant differences were observed by race/ethnicity, cancer history, age, and smartphone use; for PSA screening, only age was significant in fully adjusted models. IMPACT: Our results demonstrate that while access to smartphones and mobile health apps may be prevalent among minority communities, other social and demographic characteristics are more likely to influence screening behaviors.