Sexual dysfunction in patients with cancer, a challenge in oncology practice: results of the CLARIFY project.

BACKGROUND: Sexual dysfunction (SD) associated with oncological treatment is a common and understudied disorder. Our aim was to characterize SD in a cohort of Spanish patients. METHODS: Analytic observational study in patients included in the CLARIFY H2020 project at the Hospital Universitario Puerta de Hierro. Clinical variables and validated measures of sexual function were collected from October 2020 to May 2022. Frequency and quality of sexual activity were assessed. Descriptive, trend associations, and logistic regression analyses were performed. RESULTS: A total of 383 patients were included: breast cancer 68.14% (261), lung cancer 26.37% (101), and lymphoma 5.50% (21). Mean age was 56.5 years (range 33-88). 19.58% (75) were men and 80.42% (308) were women. 69% and 31% of men and women, respectively, reported being sexually active. The absolute frequency of overall sexual dissatisfaction was 76% in women and 24% in men. Women with breast cancer were most likely to have severe sexual dysfunction. Those with early disease had resolved complaints after 5 years. In multinomial logistic regression, significant associations were found in women with metastatic breast cancer and severe disorders of arousal (p 0.000), lubrication (p 0.002), orgasm (p 0.000), as well as dissatisfaction with sexual performance (p 0.000) and global sexual dissatisfaction (p 0.000). Women with lung cancer have severe arousal dysfunction (p 0.016) and global sexual dissatisfaction (p 0.044). CONCLUSIONS: Our population has a high prevalence of SD, which supports the need to increase awareness of this disorder among the medical oncology team and the importance of including sexual health assessment in oncological patient follow-up.

Unconscious bias in speaker introductions at a national vascular surgery meeting: The impact of rank, race and gender.

OBJECTIVES: Unconscious bias can impact manner of speaker introductions in formal academic settings. We examined speaker introductions at the Society of Vascular Surgeons Annual Meeting to determine factors associated with non-professional address. METHODS: We examined speaker introductions from the 2019 SVS Vascular Annual Meeting. Professional title with either full name or last name was considered professional address. Speaker and moderator demographics were collected. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were performed to identify associations between introduction and speaker and moderator characteristics. RESULTS: 336 talks met inclusion criteria. Both speakers and moderators were more likely to be white (63.4 â€‹% and 65.8 â€‹%,p â€‹= â€‹0.92), man (75.6 â€‹% and 74.4 â€‹%,p â€‹= â€‹0.82) and full professor rank (34.5 â€‹% and 42.3 â€‹%, p â€‹< â€‹0.001). On multivariable regression, non-professional address was associated with speaker rank of trainee (OR 3.13, p â€‹= â€‹0.05) and when moderator was white (OR 2.42, p â€‹= â€‹0.03). CONCLUSIONS: This study emphasizes the potential negative impact of unconscious bias at a national meeting for vascular surgeons and the need to mitigate this effect at the organization level.

Updating the Targeted Therapy Paradigm for Patients With Metastatic NSCLC.

The treatment paradigm for metastatic non-small cell lung cancer has changed significantly since the advent of targeted therapy. During JADPRO Live 2022, presenters focused on important updates to clinical practice guidelines, data from recent clinical trials of biomarkers and their respective targeted therapies, and best practices for monitoring and managing side effects associated with targeted therapies for metastatic non-small cell lung cancer.

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.

Research Priorities for Interventions to Address Health Disparities in Lung Nodule Management: An Official American Thoracic Society Research Statement.

Background: Lung nodules are common incidental findings, and timely evaluation is critical to ensure diagnosis of localized-stage and potentially curable lung cancers. Rates of guideline-concordant lung nodule evaluation are low, and the risk of delayed evaluation is higher for minoritized groups. Objectives: To summarize the existing evidence, identify knowledge gaps, and prioritize research questions related to interventions to reduce disparities in lung nodule evaluation. Methods: A multidisciplinary committee was convened to review the evidence and identify key knowledge gaps in four domains: 1) research methodology, 2) patient-level interventions, 3) clinician-level interventions, and 4) health system-level interventions. A modified Delphi approach was used to identify research priorities. Results: Key knowledge gaps included 1) a lack of standardized approaches to identify factors associated with lung nodule management disparities, 2) limited data evaluating the role of social determinants of health on disparities in lung nodule management, 3) a lack of certainty regarding the optimal strategy to improve patient-clinician communication and information transmission and/or retention, and 4) a paucity of information on the impact of patient navigators and culturally trained multidisciplinary teams. Conclusions: This statement outlines a research agenda intended to stimulate high-impact studies of interventions to mitigate disparities in lung nodule evaluation. Research questions were prioritized around the following domains: 1) need for methodologic guidelines for conducting research related to disparities in nodule management, 2) evaluating how social determinants of health influence lung nodule evaluation, 3) studying approaches to improve patient-clinician communication, and 4) evaluating the utility of patient navigators and culturally enriched multidisciplinary teams to reduce disparities.

Localized prostate cancer disparities in risk group at presentation and access to treatment for Hispanic men.

BACKGROUND: Despite great heterogeneity amongst Hispanic groups, prostate cancer studies often report Hispanic patients in aggregate. We sought to identify differences in prostate cancer risk group at presentation and treatment status among Hispanic subgroup populations. METHODS: Patients with localized prostate adenocarcinoma diagnosed from 2004-2017 were identified in the National Cancer Database (NCDB) and disaggregated by racial subgroup and Hispanic country of origin. Ordinal logistic regression defined adjusted odds ratios (AORs) with 95% CI of (1) presenting at progressively higher risk group and (2) receiving treatment with intermediate-unfavorable or high-risk disease. RESULTS: In our sample (n = 895,087), Hispanic men had greater odds of presenting with higher-risk localized prostate cancer compared with non-Hispanic White men (AOR = 1.18 95% CI 1.16-1.21, p < 0.001). Additionally, Hispanic Black men were less likely to present with higher-risk disease than non-Hispanic Black men. Disparities also existed when disaggregated by country of origin, particularly for Mexican men. Amongst men with unfavorable-risk disease, Hispanic men were less likely to receive treatment than non-Hispanic White men (95% CI 0.57-0.67, p < 0.001). The odds of Hispanic Black patients receiving treatment was 2.00 times the odds (95% CI 1.17-3.41 p = 0.011) of non-Hispanic Black patients receiving treatment. Upon disaggregation by country of origin, disparities persisted, particularly for Mexican men. CONCLUSION: We found marked heterogeneity when risk group at presentation and treatment for higher-risk disease were disaggregated by racial subgroup and country of origin. Our findings support further collection of disaggregated data in Hispanic communities and study of potential mechanisms underlying the observed differences.

Disparities in the Inclusion of Racial and Ethnic Minority Groups and Older Adults in Prostate Cancer Clinical Trials: A Meta-analysis.

Importance: Prostate cancer (PCa) is marked by disparities in clinical outcomes by race, ethnicity, and age. Equitable enrollment in clinical trials is fundamental to promoting health equity. Objective: To evaluate disparities in the inclusion of racial and ethnic minority groups and older adults across PCa clinical trials. Data Sources: MEDLINE, Embase, and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched to identify primary trial reports from each database's inception through February 2021. Global incidence in age subgroups and US population-based incidence in racial and ethnic subgroups were acquired from the Global Burden of Disease and Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results 21 incidence databases respectively. Study Selection: All phase 2/3 randomized PCa clinical trials were eligible for age disparity analyses. Trials recruiting exclusively from the US were eligible for primary racial and ethnic disparity analyses. Data Extraction and Synthesis: This study was reported in accordance with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) reporting guidelines. Data were pooled using a random-effects model. Main Outcomes and Measures: Enrollment incidence ratios (EIRs), trial proportions (TPs) of participants 65 years or older or members of a racial and ethnic subgroup divided by global incidence in the corresponding age group, or US population-based incidence in the corresponding racial and ethnic subgroup, were calculated. Meta-regression was used to explore associations between trial characteristics and EIRs and trends in EIRs during the past 3 decades. Results: Of 9552 participants among trials reporting race, 954 (10.8%) were African American/Black, 80 (1.5%) were Asian/Pacific Islander, and 8518 (78.5) were White. Of 65 US trials, 45 (69.2%) reported race and only 9 (13.8%) reported data on all 5 US racial categories. Of 286 global trials, 75 (26.2%) reported the enrollment proportion of older adults. Outcomes by race and age were reported in 2 (3.1%) and 41 (15.0%) trials, respectively. Black (EIR, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.59-0.83) and Hispanic (EIR, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.59-0.83) patients were significantly underrepresented in US trials. There was no disparity in older adult representation (TP, 21 143 [71.1%]; EIR, 1.00; 95% CI, 0.95-1.05). The representation of Black patients was lower in larger trials (meta-regression coefficient, -0.06; 95% CI, -0.10 to -0.02; P = .002). Conclusions and Relevance: The results of this meta-analysis suggest that Black and Hispanic men are underrepresented in trials compared with their share of PCa incidence. The representation of Black patients has consistently remained low during the past 2 decades.

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.

Efficacy of immune checkpoint inhibitors in non-small cell lung cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Background: Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have demonstrated remarkable efficacy in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). However, only a minority of NSCLC patients benefit from ICIs, and whether the magnitude of benefit is specific factor-dependent remains unclear. We performed a systematic review to improve our understanding of clinicopathologic and biomolecular features associated with improved survival upon treatment with ICIs for NSCLC. Methods: We searched PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, and Scopus from database inception to August 31, 2021, for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing overall survival (OS) in NSCLC treated with ICIs vs control therapies. We calculated the pooled OS hazard ratio (HR) and 95% CI in subgroups using a random-effects model, and assessed the heterogeneity between the paired estimates using an interaction test. Results: A total of 23 RCTs involving 15,829 patients were included. We found that wild-type EGFR, high PD-L1 expression, and high bTMB were associated with a significant OS benefit from ICIs, but not mutant EGFR, low PD-L1 expression, and low bTMB. The differences of OS benefit between wild-type and mutant EGFR (HR=1.53, 95%CI 1.13-2.08), high and low PD-L1 (HR=1.35; 95%CI 1.14-1.61), high and low bTMB (HR=1.71; 95%CI 1.17-2.52) were statistically significant. OS benefit was found in all subgroups regardless of sex, age, ECOG PS, histology, smoking history, baseline brain metastasis, race, and region, and the interaction test demonstrated no significant difference of the OS benefit between these opposed subgroups (e.g. male vs female). Conclusions: Wild-type EGFR, high PD-L1 expression, and high bTMB are associated with a greater magnitude of efficacy from ICIs vs control therapies in NSCLC. However, the administration of ICIs should not be restricted to other clinicopathological factors (sex, smoking history, race, etc.).

Disparities in Primary Breast Cancer Stage at Presentation Among Hispanic Subgroups.

BACKGROUND: Although the United States (US) Hispanic population consists of diverse communities, prior breast cancer studies often analyze this group in aggregate. Our aim was to identify differences in breast cancer stage at presentation in the US population, with a particular focus on Hispanic subgroups. METHODS: Data from the National Cancer Database (NCDB) from 2004 to 2017 were used to select women with primary breast cancer; individuals were disaggregated by racial and ethnic subgroup and Hispanic country of origin. Ordinal logistic regression was used to create adjusted odds ratios (aORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs), with higher odds representing presentation at later-stage breast cancer. Subgroup analysis was conducted based on tumor receptor status. RESULTS: Overall, among 2,282,691 women (5.2% Hispanic), Hispanic women were more likely to live in low-income and low-educational attainment neighborhoods, and were also more likely to be uninsured. Hispanic women were also more likely to present at later-stage primary breast cancer when compared with non-Hispanic White women (aOR 1.19, 95% CI 1.18-1.21; p < 0.01). Stage disparities were demonstrated when populations were disaggregated by country of origin, particularly for Mexican women (aOR 1.55, 95% CI 1.51-1.60; p < 0.01). Disparities worsened among both racial and country of origin subgroups in women with triple-negative disease. CONCLUSION: Later breast cancer stage at presentation was observed among Hispanic populations when disaggregated by racial subgroup and country of origin. Socioeconomic disparities, as well as uncaptured disparities in access and/or differential care, may drive these observed differences. Future studies with disaggregated data are needed to characterize outcomes in Hispanic communities and develop targeted interventions.

Therapy for Stage IV Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer With Driver Alterations: ASCO Living Guideline.

PURPOSE: To provide evidence-based recommendations updating the 2021 ASCO and Ontario Health (Cancer Care Ontario) guideline on systemic therapy for patients with stage IV non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) with driver alterations. METHODS: ASCO updated recommendations on the basis of an ongoing systematic review of randomized control trials from 2020 to 2021. RESULTS: This guideline update reflects changes in evidence since the previous update. Two studies provide the evidence base. Outcomes of interest include efficacy and safety. RECOMMENDATIONS: For patients with an anaplastic lymphoma kinase rearrangement, a performance status (PS) of 0-2, and previously untreated NSCLC, clinicians should offer alectinib or brigatinib or lorlatinib. For patients with an anaplastic lymphoma kinase rearrangement, a PS of 0-2, and previously untreated NSCLC, if alectinib, brigatinib, or lorlatinib are not available, clinicians should offer ceritinib or crizotinib. For patients with a RET rearrangement, a PS of 0-2, and previously untreated NSCLC, clinicians may offer selpercatinib or pralsetinib. In second line, for patients with a RET rearrangement who have not received RET-targeted therapy, clinicians may offer selpercatinib or pralsetinib.Additional information is available at www.asco.org/thoracic-cancer-guidelines.

Therapy for Stage IV Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer Without Driver Alterations: ASCO Living Guideline.

PURPOSE: To provide evidence-based recommendations updating the 2020 ASCO and Ontario Health (Cancer Care Ontario) guideline on systemic therapy for patients with stage IV non-small-cell lung cancer without driver alterations. METHODS: ASCO updated recommendations on the basis of an ongoing systematic review of randomized clinical trials from 2018 to 2021. RESULTS: This guideline update reflects changes in evidence since the previous update. Five randomized clinical trials provide the evidence base. Outcomes of interest include efficacy and safety. RECOMMENDATIONS: In addition to 2020 options for patients with high programmed death ligand-1 (PD-L1) expression (tumor proportion score [TPS] ≥ 50%), nonsquamous cell carcinoma (non-SCC), and performance status (PS) 0-1, clinicians may offer single-agent atezolizumab. With high PD-L1 expression (TPS ≥ 50%), non-SCC, and PS 0-1, clinicians may offer nivolumab and ipilumumab alone or nivolumab and ipilimumab plus chemotherapy. With negative (0%) and low positive PD-L1 expression (TPS 1%-49%), non-SCC, and PS 0-1, clinicians may offer nivolumab and ipilimumab alone or nivolumab and ipilimumab plus chemotherapy. With high PD-L1 expression, SCC, and PS 0-1, clinicians may offer single-agent atezolizumab. With high PD-L1 expression, squamous cell carcinoma (SCC), and PS 0-1, clinicians may offer nivolumab and ipilimumab alone or in combination with two cycles of platinum-based chemotherapy. With negative and low positive PD-L1 expression, SCC, and PS 0-1, clinicians may offer nivolumab and ipilimumab alone or in combination with two cycles of platinum-based chemotherapy. With non-SCC who received an immune checkpoint inhibitor and chemotherapy as first-line therapy, clinicians may offer second-line paclitaxel plus bevacizumab. With non-SCC, who received chemotherapy with or without bevacizumab and immune checkpoint inhibitor therapy, clinicians should offer the options of third-line single-agent pemetrexed, docetaxel, or paclitaxel plus bevacizumab.Additional information is available at www.asco.org/thoracic-cancer-guidelines.

Microaggressions, Bias, and Equity in the Workplace: Why Does It Matter, and What Can Oncologists Do?

Despite efforts to embrace diversity, women and members of racial, ethnic, and gender minority groups continue to experience bias, inequities, microaggressions, and unwelcoming atmospheres in the workplace. Specifically, women in oncology have lower promotion rates and less financial support and mentorship, and they are less likely to hold leadership positions. These experiences are exceedingly likely at the intersection of identities, leading to decreased satisfaction, increased burnout, and a higher probability of leaving the workforce. Microaggressions have also been associated with depression, suicidal thoughts, and other health and safety issues. Greater workplace diversity and equity are associated with improved financial performance; greater productivity, satisfaction, and retention; improved health care delivery; and higher-quality research. In this article, we provide tools and steps to promote equity in the oncology workplace and achieve cultural change. We propose the use of tailored approaches and tools, such as active listening, for individuals to become microaggression upstanders; we also propose the implementation of education, evaluation, and transparent policies to promote a culture of equity and diversity in the oncology workplace.

Dónde Están? Latinx/Hispanic Representation in the Oncology Workforce: Present and Future.

This manuscript reviews the status of Hispanic/Latinx physicians in oncology, the benefits and challenges to achieving equitable representation, and potential solutions and actions to increase diversity in the oncology workforce. Persons of Hispanic/Latinx origin comprise 18.7% of the population and 16.8% of the adult population in the United States but are only 4.7% of practicing oncologists. The reasons for the lack of representation of Hispanic/Latinx individuals in medicine are multifaceted and include discrimination and biases, exclusionary practices, financial barriers, and lack of role modeling. As a result, patients are deprived the benefits of a representative workforce, such as improved access, enhanced culturally and linguistically competent care, and minimization of health disparities. Solutions included in the manuscript include a description of efforts by ASCO to improve the representativeness of the oncology workforce through its awards programs and educational efforts, especially for Hispanic/Latinx clinicians. The manuscript also outlines individual actions that attending physicians, senior oncologists, oncology leaders, and hospital/cancer center leadership can take to improve the diversity of the oncology workforce and support our Latinx/Hispanic trainees and colleagues. Improving the representativeness of the oncology workforce will require collective action by institutions, medical societies, and individuals. Nevertheless, widespread commitment to creating an inclusive and supported workforce is necessary to ensure the quality of care for minority patients, reduce existing cancer care disparities, and advance innovation in oncology.