Radiation therapy for retroperitoneal sarcoma: practice patterns in North America.

BACKGROUND: The addition of radiation therapy (RT) to surgery in retroperitoneal sarcoma (RPS) remains controversial. We examined practice patterns in the use of RT for patients with RPS over time in a large, national cohort. METHODS: Patients in the National Cancer Database (2004-2017) who underwent resection of RPS were included. Trends over time for proportions were calculated using contingency tables with Cochran-Armitage Trend test. RESULTS: Of 7,485 patients who underwent resection, 1,821 (24.3%) received RT (adjuvant: 59.9%, neoadjuvant: 40.1%). The use of RT decreased annually by < 1% (p = 0.0178). There was an average annual increase of neoadjuvant RT by 13% compared to an average annual decrease of adjuvant RT by 6% (p < 0.0001). Treatment at high-volume centers (OR 14.795, p < 0.0001) and tumor > 10 cm (OR 2.009, p = 0.001) were associated with neoadjuvant RT. In contrast liposarcomas (OR 0.574, p = 0.001) were associated with adjuvant RT. There was no statistically significant difference in overall survival between patients treated with surgery alone versus surgery and RT (p = 0.07). CONCLUSION: In the United States, the use of RT for RPS has decreased over time, with a shift towards neoadjuvant RT. However, a large percentage of patients are still receiving adjuvant RT and this mostly occurs at low-volume hospitals.

Disparities in Survival and NCCN Guideline-Concordant Care in Patients With Extremity Soft Tissue Sarcoma.

BACKGROUND: Based on the NCCN Guidelines for Soft Tissue Sarcoma (STS), treatment of extremity STS (ESTS) includes radiation therapy (RT) and surgical resection for tumors that are high-grade and >5 cm. ​​The aim of this study was to describe the association between neighborhood socioeconomic status (nSES), concordance with NCCN Guidelines recommendations, and outcomes in patients with ESTS. METHODS: Patients with ESTS diagnosed from 2006 through 2018 were identified in SEER registries. The analytic cohort was restricted to patients with high-grade tumors >5 cm without nodal or distant metastases who received limb-sparing surgery. Patient demographics and tumor characteristics associated with receipt of RT were analyzed using adjusted regression analyses. Kaplan-Meier curves and adjusted accelerated failure time models were used to examine disparities in cancer-specific survival. RESULTS: Of 2,249 patients, 29.0% (n=648) received neoadjuvant RT, 49.7% (n=1,111) received adjuvant or intraoperative RT, and 21.3% (n=476) did not receive RT. In adjusted analyses, lower nSES was associated with lower likelihood of receiving RT (odds ratio, 0.70 [95% CI, 0.57-0.87]; P<.001). Low nSES was associated with worse cancer-specific survival (hazard ratio, 1.19 [95% CI, 1.01-1.40]; P=.04). Race and ethnicity were not significant predictors of receipt of RT or cancer-specific survival in the fully adjusted models. CONCLUSIONS: Patients from lower nSES areas were less likely to receive NCCN Guideline-recommended RT for their ESTS and had worse cancer-specific survival. Efforts to better define and resolve disparities in the treatment and survival of patients with ESTS are warranted.

Preoperative radiation therapy increases adherence in patients with high-risk extremity soft tissue sarcoma.

BACKGROUND: Surgery and radiation therapy remain the standard of care for patients with high-grade extremity soft tissue sarcoma that are >5 cm. Radiation therapy is time and labor-intensive for patients, and social determinants of health may affect adherence. The aim of this study was to define demographic, clinical, and treatment factors associated with the completion of radiation therapy and determine if preoperative radiation therapy improved adherence compared to postoperative radiation therapy. METHODS: The cohort included patients in the National Cancer Database with high-grade extremity soft tissue sarcoma >5 cm without nodal or distant metastases who received limb-sparing surgery and radiation therapy with microscopically negative R0 margins. Multivariable logistic regression analyses identified factors associated with radiation therapy sequencing and adherence (defined as completion of 50 Gy preoperative radiation therapy or at least 60 Gy postoperative radiation therapy). A multivariable Cox Proportional Hazards model assessed overall survival. RESULTS: Among 2,145 patients, 47.1% received preoperative radiation therapy (n = 1,010), and 52.9% (n = 1135) received postoperative radiation therapy. A greater proportion of patients treated with preoperative (77.2%) versus postoperative radiation therapy (64.9%, P < .0001) received the recommended dose. More patients with private insurance (49.8% vs 35.3% Medicaid vs 44.9% Medicare, P = .011) and patients treated at an academic medical center (52.6% vs 47.4%, P < .001) received preoperative radiation therapy. Patients who received preoperative radiation therapy had lower odds of receiving insufficient doses of radiation therapy (odds ratio 0.34 [95% CI 0.27-0.47]). Neither radiation therapy adherence nor sequencing were independent predictors of overall survival. CONCLUSIONS: Patients who received preoperative radiation therapy were more likely to complete therapy and receive an optimal dose than patients treated with postoperative radiation therapy. Preoperative radiation therapy improves adherence and should be widely considered in patients with high-grade extremity soft tissue sarcoma, particularly in patients at risk for not completing therapy.

Telemedicine Abortion.

Telemedicine has become a substantial part of abortion care in recent years. In this review, we discuss the history and regulatory landscape of telemedicine for medication abortion in the United States, different models of care for telemedicine, and the safety and effectiveness of medication abortion via telemedicine, including using history-based screening protocols for medication abortion without ultrasound. We also explore the acceptability of telemedicine for patients and their perspectives on its benefits, as well as the use of telemedicine for other parts of abortion care. Telemedicine has expanded access to abortion for many, although there remain limitations to its implementation.

Evaluation of the association of area-level socioeconomic deprivation and breast cancer recurrence by oestrogen receptor subtypes in Scotland.

BACKGROUND: Women from socioeconomically deprived areas have lower breast cancer (BC) incidence rates for screen-detected oestrogen receptor (ER) + tumours and higher mortality for select tumour subtypes. We aimed to determine if ipsilateral breast cancer recurrence (IBR) differs by Scottish Index of Multiple Deprivation (SIMD) quintile and tumour subtype in Scotland. METHODS: Patient data for primary invasive BC diagnosed in 2007-2008 in Scotland was analysed. Manual case-note review for 3495 patients from 10 years post-diagnosis was used. To determine the probability of IBR while accounting for the competing risk of death from any cause, cumulative incidence functions stratified by ER subtype and surgery were plotted. Multivariable Cox Proportional Hazards models were used to estimate the association of SIMD accounting for other predictors of IBR. RESULTS: Among 2819 ER + tumours, 423 patients had a recurrence and 438 died. SIMD was related to death (p = 0.018) with the most deprived more likely to have died in the 10-year period (17.7% vs. 12.9%). We found no significant differences by SIMD in prognostic tumour characteristics (grade, TNM stage, treatment, screen-detection) or risk of IBR. Among 676 patients diagnosed with ER- tumours, 105 died and 185 had a recurrence. We found no significant differences in prognostic tumour characteristics by SIMD except screen detection with the most deprived more likely than the least to have their tumours detected from screening (46.9% vs. 28%, p = 0.03). Among patients with ER- tumours, 50% had mastectomy and the most deprived had increased 5-year IBR risk compared to the least deprived (HR 3.03 [1.41-6.53]). CONCLUSIONS: IBR is not a major contributor to mortality differences by SIMD for the majority of BC patients in our study. The lack of inequities in IBR are likely due to standardised treatment protocols and access to healthcare. The association with socioeconomic deprivation and recurrence for ER- tumours requires further study.

A description of Kaposi sarcoma risk factors and outcomes in HIV-positive and HIV-negative patients at a tertiary care medical center from 2005 to 2020.

Kaposi sarcoma (KS) is a low-grade vascular malignancy caused by human herpesvirus-8 (HHV-8), also known as Kaposi's sarcoma-associated herpesvirus (KSHV). There are four established subtypes of KS, which are described by unique risk factors, presentation, and disease course. A "non-epidemic" variant to describe HIV-negative men who have sex with men (MSM) is emerging as a fifth subtype. We retrospectively examined patients with KS at an academic medical center in central Ohio, USA. To our knowledge, this is the first US-based report to describe KS risk factors and outcomes in the context of HIV status. Data were extracted from patient charts including demographic information, history at time of KS diagnosis, and information about KS disease course. HIV-positive and HIV-negative patients were grouped into established categories. HIV-negative patients who did not fit an existing subtype were described as "Unclassified-KS-Type." Demographic characteristics for AIDS-KS patients in our cohort match established trends in this subtype, such as male, MSM, and younger age at diagnosis compared to HIV-negative patients. Most Unclassified-KS-Type patients fit well into the emerging "non-epidemic KS" subtype. These patients are described as healthy, middle-aged, HIV-negative MSM with lower extremity lesions. This descriptive report provides an updated view of KS risk factors and outcomes to improve detection and treatment in dermatology.

Participation of Patients From Racial and Ethnic Minority Groups in Phase 1 Early Cancer Drug Development Trials in the US, 2000-2018.

Importance: Despite federal initiatives encouraging the enrollment of individuals from racial and ethnic minority groups in US clinical trials, no studies to date have specifically examined demographic disparities among participants in phase 1 drug development trials for patients with metastatic cancer. Objective: To assess trends in the enrollment of patients from racial and ethnic minority groups in US phase 1 therapeutic drug trials for metastatic cancer from 2000 to 2018. Design, Setting, and Participants: In this cross-sectional study, ClinicalTrials.gov was queried in July 2021 to identify completed phase 1 drug trials for metastatic cancer in the US from January 1, 2000, to December 31, 2018, with published results, yielding 221 phase 1 trials with 8309 participants aged 18 years or older with metastatic solid tumors. Proportions of each racial and ethnic group of trial participants were compared with that from the North American Association of Central Cancer Registries' Cancer in North America (CiNA) database. Statistical analysis was performed from July 12, 2021, to March 15, 2022. Main Outcomes and Measures: For each racial and ethnic group, the difference between trial and CiNA proportions was examined using a 2-sample test for equality of proportions with continuity correction. Results: The 8309 phase 1 trial participants (4198 men [50.5%]; median age, 59 years) included 23 American Indian or Alaska Native participants (0.3%), 371 Asian or Pacific Islander participants (4.5%), 514 Black participants (6.2%), 401 of 5076 Hispanic or Latinx participants (7.9%), and 7154 White participants (86.1%). Industry funded 165 of the 221 trials (74.7%). White patients were overrepresented overall compared with the corresponding CiNA cohort (7154 of 8309 [86.1%] vs 4 113 096 of 4 891 486 [84.1%]; difference, 2.0 percentage points; P < .001). There was an increase in overrepresentation of White patients from 2000 to 2011 (trials, 2780 of 3245 [85.7%]; CiNA, 2 378 019 of 2 800 711 [84.9%]; difference, 0.8 percentage points; P = .23) to 2012-2018 (trials, 4374 of 5063 [86.4%]; CiNA, 1 735 077 of 2 090 775 [82.9%]; difference, 3.5 percentage points; P < .001) and corresponding worsening representation of American Indian or Alaska Native patients (2000-2011: trials, 10 of 3245 [0.3%]; CiNA, 10 905 of 2 800 711 [0.4%]; difference, -0.08 percentage points; 2012-2018: trials, 13 of 5063 [0.3%]; CiNA, 9484 of 2 090 775 [0.5%]; difference, -0.20 percentage points), Asian or Pacific Islander patients (2000-2011: trials, 121 of 3245 [3.7%]; CiNA, 75 033 of 2 800 711 [2.7%]; difference, 1.1 percentage points; 2012-2018: trials, 151 of 5063 [3.0%]; CiNA 70 535 of 2 090 775 [3.4%]; difference, -0.75 percentage points), Black patients (2000-2011: trials, 244 of 3245 [7.5%]; CiNA, 322 701 of 2 800 711 [11.5%]; difference, -4.0 percentage points; 2012-2018: trials, 270 of 5063 [5.3%]; CiNA, 255 625 of 2 090 775 [12.2%]; difference, -6.9 percentage points), and Hispanic or Latinx patients (2000-2011: trials, 161 of 1792 [9.0%]; CiNA, 169 297 of 2 800 711 [6.0%]; difference, 3.0 percentage points; 2012-2018: trials, 240 of 3295 [7.3%]; CiNA, 156 118 of 2 090 775 [7.5%]; difference, -0.2 percentage points). Similar disparities were observed when comparing industry-funded and academic center-sponsored trials. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cross-sectional study of participants in phase 1 clinical trials of drugs for metastatic cancer, worsening disparities were observed over time in the accrual of patients from racial and ethnic minority groups. These findings may represent widening inequalities in access to trial sites and worsening systemic biases. More efforts are needed to diversify phase 1 cancer drug trials to improve equity in access to new treatments and to ensure that safety and efficacy findings from early drug trials are generalizable across populations.

Relationships between the Religious Backgrounds and Evolution Acceptance of Black and Hispanic Biology Students.

The evolution education experiences of students of color represent an emerging area of research, because past inquiries indicate these students have differential outcomes, such as lower evolution acceptance and severe underrepresentation in evolutionary biology. Religion is often an important support for students of color who are navigating a science, technology, engineering, and mathematics culture that privileges White nonreligious students. For instance, religion helps mitigate the negative effects of racism, but religious students are also more likely to experience conflict when learning evolution. In this nationwide study, we examined the extent to which strong religiosity among students of color can explain their lower evolution acceptance. We surveyed students in 77 college biology courses across 17 states and found that Black/African American students tend to be more religious and less accepting of evolution than any other racial/ethnic identity group and that Hispanic students tend to be slightly more religious and slightly less accepting of evolution than White students. Importantly, we find that religious background is an important factor associated with Black and Hispanic students' lower levels of evolution acceptance. This study suggests that the biology community should become more inclusive of Christian religious students if it wishes to foster inclusive evolution education for Black and Hispanic students.

"Accepting Evolution Means You Can't Believe in God": Atheistic Perceptions of Evolution among College Biology Students.

Although many scientists agree that evolution does not make claims about God/god(s), students might assume that evolution is atheistic, and this may lead to lower evolution acceptance. In study 1, we surveyed 1081 college biology students at one university about their religiosity and evolution acceptance and asked what religious ideas someone would have to reject if that person were to accept evolution. Approximately half of students wrote that a person cannot believe in God/religion and accept evolution, indicating that these students may have atheistic perceptions of evolution. Religiosity was not related to whether a student wrote that evolution is atheistic, but writing that evolution is atheistic was associated with lower evolution acceptance among the more religious students. In study 2, we collected data from 1898 students in eight states in the United States using a closed-ended survey. We found that 56.5% of students perceived that evolution is atheistic even when they were given the option to choose an agnostic perception of evolution. Further, among the most religious students, those who thought evolution is atheistic were less accepting of evolution, less comfortable learning evolution, and perceived greater conflict between their personal religious beliefs and evolution than those who thought evolution is agnostic.