#4Corners4Health Social Media Cancer Prevention Campaign for Emerging Adults: Protocol for a Randomized Stepped-Wedge Trial.

BACKGROUND: Many emerging adults (EAs) are prone to making unhealthy choices, which increase their risk of premature cancer morbidity and mortality. In the era of social media, rigorous research on interventions to promote health behaviors for cancer risk reduction among EAs delivered over social media is limited. Cancer prevention information and recommendations may reach EAs more effectively over social media than in settings such as health care, schools, and workplaces, particularly for EAs residing in rural areas. OBJECTIVE: This pragmatic randomized trial aims to evaluate a multirisk factor intervention using a social media campaign designed with community advisers aimed at decreasing cancer risk factors among EAs. The trial will target EAs from diverse backgrounds living in rural counties in the Four Corners states of Arizona, Colorado, New Mexico, and Utah. METHODS: We will recruit a sample of EAs (n=1000) aged 18 to 26 years residing in rural counties (Rural-Urban Continuum Codes 4 to 9) in the Four Corners states from the Qualtrics' research panel and enroll them in a randomized stepped-wedge, quasi-experimental design. The inclusion criteria include English proficiency and regular social media engagement. A social media intervention will promote guideline-related goals for increased physical activity, healthy eating, and human papillomavirus vaccination and reduced nicotine product use, alcohol intake, and solar UV radiation exposure. Campaign posts will cover digital and media literacy skills, responses to misinformation, communication with family and friends, and referral to community resources. The intervention will be delivered over 12 months in Facebook private groups and will be guided by advisory groups of community stakeholders and EAs and focus groups with EAs. The EAs will complete assessments at baseline and at 12, 26, 39, 52, and 104 weeks after randomization. Assessments will measure 6 cancer risk behaviors, theoretical mediators, and participants' engagement with the social media campaign. RESULTS: The trial is in its start-up phase. It is being led by a steering committee. Team members are working in 3 subcommittees to optimize community engagement, the social media intervention, and the measures to be used. The Stakeholder Organization Advisory Board and Emerging Adult Advisory Board were formed and provided initial input on the priority of cancer risk factors to target, social media use by EAs, and community resources available. A framework for the social media campaign with topics, format, and theoretical mediators has been created, along with protocols for campaign management. CONCLUSIONS: Social media can be used as a platform to counter misinformation and improve reliable health information to promote health behaviors that reduce cancer risks among EAs. Because of the popularity of web-based information sources among EAs, an innovative, multirisk factor intervention using a social media campaign has the potential to reduce their cancer risk behaviors. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05618158; https://classic.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT05618158. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): PRR1-10.2196/50392.

Developing questions to assess and measure patients' perceived survival benefit from adjuvant endocrine therapy in breast cancer: a mixed methods pilot study.

This mixed method study developed multiple question types to understand and measure women's perceived benefit from adjuvant endocrine therapy. We hypothesis that patients do not understand this benefit and sought to develop the questions needed to test this hypothesis and obtain initial patient estimates. From 8/2022 to 3/2023, qualitative interviews focused on assessing and modifying 9 initial varied question types asking about the overall survival (OS) benefit from adjuvant endocrine therapy. Subsequent focus groups modified and selected the optimal questions. Patients' self-assessment of their OS benefit was compared to their individualized PREDICT model results. Fifty-three patients completed the survey; 42% Hispanic, 30% rural, and 47% with income < $39,999 per year. Patients reported adequate health care literacy (61.5%) and average confidence about treatment and medication decisions 49.4 (95% CI 24.4-59.5). From the original 9 questions, 3 modified questions were ultimately found to capture patients' perception of this OS benefit, focusing on graphical and prose styles. Patients estimated an OS benefit of 42% compared to 4.4% calculated from the PREDICT model (p < 0.001). In this group with considerable representation from ethnic minority, rural and low-income patients, qualitative data showed that more than one modality of question type was needed to clearly capture patients' understanding of treatment benefit. Women with breast cancer significantly overestimated their 10-year OS benefit from adjuvant endocrine therapy compared to the PREDICT model.

Differing Experiences of Nutrition Care During Treatment Among Oncology Nurses, Providers, and Patients.

BACKGROUND: Provision of nutrition care for patients with cancer represents a key component of holistic oncology care. However, information is limited about the use and perceptions of registered dietitian-led nutrition care in the oncology setting. OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to better understand the experiences and expectations of patients and healthcare workers regarding nutrition care during outpatient cancer treatment. METHODS: Oncology care team members (N = 55) and patients (N = 90) completed a survey about their knowledge of and interest in nutrition care. A subset of participants completed semistructured interviews to capture experiences with and perspectives on nutrition care practices. FINDINGS: The majority of patients (n = 73) reported experiencing at least one nutrition impact symptom, but only 14 indicated that they frequently discussed nutrition during provider visits. In addition, 40 oncology care team members indicated frequently discussing nutrition at visits, although 13 were unaware of local nutrition resources.

Developing Questions to Assess and Measure Patients' Perceived Survival Benefit from Adjuvant Endocrine Therapy in Breast Cancer: A Mixed Methods Pilot Study.

Purpose: This mixed methods study developed multiple question types to understand and measure women's perceived benefit from adjuvant endocrine therapy. We hypothesis that patients do not understand this benefit and sought to develop the questions needed to test this hypothesis and obtain initial patient estimates. Methods: From 8/2022 to 3/2023, qualitative interviews focused on assessing and modifying 9 initial varied question types asking about the overall survival (OS) benefit from adjuvant endocrine therapy. Subsequent focus groups modified and selected the optimal questions. Patients' self-assessment of their OS benefit was compared to their individualized PREDICT model results. Results: Fifty-three patients completed the survey; 42% Hispanic, 30% rural, and 47% with income <$39,999 per year. Patients reported adequate health care literacy (61.5%) and average confidence about treatment and medication decisions 49.4 (95% CI 24.4-59.5). From the original 9 questions, 3 modified questions were ultimately found to capture patients' perception of this OS benefit, focusing on graphical and prose styles. Patients estimated an OS benefit of 42% compared to 4.4% calculated from the PREDICT model (p < 0.001). Conclusion: In this group with considerable representation from ethnic minority, rural and low-income patients, qualitative data showed that more than one modality of question type was needed to clearly capture patients' understanding of treatment benefit. Women with breast cancer significantly overestimated their 10-year OS benefit from adjuvant endocrine therapy compared to the PREDICT model.

Assessing Impact of Nutrition Care by Registered Dietitian Nutritionists on Patient Medical and Treatment Outcomes in Outpatient Cancer Clinics: A Cohort Feasibility Study.

More information is needed about the impact of outpatient nutrition care from a registered dietitian nutritionist (RDN) on patient outcomes. This study aimed to assess the feasibility of a cohort study design to evaluate impact of RDN nutrition care on patient outcomes, describe clinic malnutrition screening practices, and estimate statistical parameters for a larger study. Seventy-seven patients with lung, esophageal, colon, rectal, or pancreatic cancer from six facilities were included (41 received RDN care and 36 did not). RDN nutrition care was prospectively documented for six months and documented emergency room visits, unplanned hospitalizations and treatment changes were retrospectively abstracted from medical records. Most facilities used the Malnutrition Screening Tool (MST) to determine malnutrition risk. Patients receiving RDN care had, on average, five, half hour visits and had more severe disease and higher initial malnutrition risk, although this varied across sites. Documented medical and treatment outcomes were relatively rare and similar between groups. Estimated sample size requirements varied from 113 to 5856, depending on tumor type and outcome, and intracluster correlation coefficients (ICCs) ranged from 0 to 0.47. Overall, the methods used in this study are feasible but an interventional or implementation design might be advantageous for a larger study.

Patient, provider, and nurse preferences of patient reported outcomes (PRO) and side effect management during cancer treatment of underrepresented racial and ethnic minority groups, rural and economically disadvantaged patients: a mixed methods study.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate patient, oncologist and nurse perspectives on side effects and patient reported outcomes (PROs) with the question of how to optimize side effect management and PRO tools in this unique population. METHODS: This pilot study utilized a mixed method explanatory design. Patients receiving intravenous (IV) chemotherapy from June to August 2020 were surveyed about side effect burden and PRO system preferences. Providers and nurses (PN) completed complementary surveys. Semi-structured phone interviews were conducted among a subset of each group. RESULTS: Of 90 patient surveys collected; 51.1% minority, 35.6% rural, and 40.0% income < $30,000, 48% felt side effect management was a significant issue. All patients reported access to a communication device but 12.2% did not own a cell phone; 68% smart phone, 20% cell phone, 22% landline, 53% computer, and 39% tablet. Patients preferred a response to reported side effects within 0-3 h (73%) while only 29% of the 55 PN surveyed did (p < 0.0001). Interviews reinforced that side effect burden was a significant issue, the varied communication devices, and a PRO system could improve side effect management. CONCLUSION: In a non-White, rural and low-income patient population, 87.8% of patients reported owning a cell phone. Although all agreed side effect management was a prominent issue, expectations between patients and PN differed substantially. Qualitative data echoed the above and providing concrete suggestions to inform development of a PRO program and side effect mitigation strategies among a diverse patient population.

The Balance Between Food and Medical Care: Experiences of Food Insecurity Among Cancer Survivors and Informal Caregivers.

Defined as an inability to acquire enough food because of insufficient money or other resources, the prevalence of food insecurity is markedly higher among cancer survivors than the general population. The objective of this qualitative study was to understand and characterize the experience of food insecurity from the perspective of cancer survivors' and their informal caregivers using qualitative interviews. Barriers to healthy eating, behaviors and strategies in times of food shortage, and unmet educational needs shaped the experience of food insecurity. These experiences and insights for addressing food insecurity in oncology practice have broad implications for future interventions.

Improving Sexual and Gender Minority Cancer Care: Patient and Caregiver Perspectives From a Multi-Methods Pilot Study.

Purpose: Up to 1 million lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (i.e., sexual and gender minority, SGM) individuals in the United States have histories of cancer. This medically underserved population is diverse, with complex sexualities and gender identities, and distinct health concerns. SGM persons experience disproportionate risks for, and rates of, anal, breast, cervical, colorectal, endometrial, lung, and prostate cancers, in addition to cancers affecting transgender persons who have undergone sex-reassignment. SGM individuals are linked by shared experiences of stigmatization as a minority population for which little cancer research has been conducted. SGM cancer patients frequently report reluctance to seek healthcare, have poorer outcomes following diagnosis, engage in elevated risk behaviors (i.e. smoking and alcohol use) even after cancer diagnosis, have difficulty making emotional adjustment to illness, and experience higher rates of psychological distress. They report less satisfaction with cancer care, deficiencies in patient-centeredness and shared decision-making, gaps in care, and social isolation. Minority stress resulting from experiences of anti-SGM sentiment and discrimination affects cancer patients and their informal cancer caregivers. Our paper presents findings from a pilot study to identify gaps and opportunities to improve cancer care for SGM patients and caregivers at the University of New Mexico Comprehensive Cancer Center. Methods: Between June 2020 and July 2021, we used a multi-methods research design informed by ecological theory to collect qualitative and quantitative data regarding cancer patient and caregiver quality of life (QoL) and experiences of cancer and survivorship care. We used PROMIS measures distributed via REDCap to assess QoL (i.e., fatigue, pain interference, pain intensity, anxiety, depression, emotional support, social isolation, and companionship), and conducted in-depth semi-structured interviews. We recruited 10 SGM cancer patients and 8 heterosexual, cisgender (H/C) patient matches, and their self-identified informal cancer caregivers (n=36, dyad total n=18). Interviews ranged from 1 to 2 hours, were audio-recorded and transcribed for analysis. The study was approved by the University of New Mexico Human Research Protections Office Institutional Review Board. Results: Results of the PROMIS QoL assessments indicated that SGM patients reported greater anxiety [mean (SD) = 54.5 (8.8)] and depression [mean (SD) = 49.3 (4.8)] than H/C patients [mean (SD)=51.6 (7.5) and 45.4 (6.8) respectively], while heterosexual, cisgender (H/C) patients reported higher fatigue [mean (SD) =52.04 (8.18)] and stronger pain intensity than SGM patients [mean (SD)=48.3 (9.1) and 37.8 (9.1) respectively]. SGM patients reported higher levels of social isolation [mean (SD) = 48.3 (7.3) vs. 42.1 (7.4) for H/C patients, whereas H/C patients reported more emotional support (mean (SD) =57.5 (9.3) vs. 53.0 (6.9)] and companionship [mean (SD) = 55.2 (8.6) vs. 51.5 (11.0)]. SGM and H/C differences in caregiver QoL were most notable with regards to higher levels of fatigue [mean (SD) = 47.1 (6.0) for SGM, and 42.4 (11.5) for H/C] and companionship [mean (SD) = 55.3 (6.0) for SGM, and 50.9 (5.5) for H/C]. Qualitative interviews supported our quantitative results. SGM patients and caregivers articulated experiences of anti-SGM stigma and discrimination contributing to minority stress that influenced their initial cancer care encounters. SGM dyads had more trepidation and/or medical mistrust during initial cancer care encounters when compared to H/C patients and caregivers. SGM patients questioned care that was not culturally responsive to SGM preferences, while H/C patients were more apt to identify gaps in communication and perceived lack of clarity regarding cancer care delivery. Although SGM patients experienced high satisfaction with their cancer care once they developed trust with their providers, they discussed desires to have more direct conversations with their oncologists about their sexual orientation and gender identities and sexual health. All patients and providers in the study (SGM and H/C) appreciated their oncology care teams. All patients and caregivers relied on social networks comprised of friends and family, although SGM patients and caregivers had smaller social networks and relied less on biological family, and single SGM individuals experienced challenges accessing cancer care and struggled with social isolation. We discovered too, that all caregivers, regardless of Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity (SOGI), perceived a lack of support and information pertaining to their loved one's treatment, side effects and best way to provide care. Conclusions: This study demonstrates that prior stigmatizing experiences contribute to minority stress and medical mistrust for SGM cancer patients and their informal caregivers across the cancer care experience. Findings point to specific gaps in SGM cancer patient care, including lack of conversation about patient SOGI, inadequate staff and oncology provider SGM specific knowledge and cultural competence/cultural humility training, and insufficient patient supports for those who lack social support during cancer care treatment. Further, this study reveals inadequacies in SGM specific support, and overall support services for informal cancer caregivers. Additional research is required to develop targeted interventions to address minority stress and clinic environment concerns to improve cancer care for SGM patients. Importantly, while there were differences between SGM and H/C experiences of cancer treatment, significant similarities also emerged. Caregiver expressed consensus about the current lack of support and guidance for informal caregivers of cancer patients. Future work should focus on providing caregiver-specific resources in the clinic setting and facilitating support groups for caregivers to network with one another, as well as for tailoring SGM specific caregiver support services. Our findings highlight areas for improving cancer care for the SGM community, as well as a broader population of patients and caregivers.

Effect of Superstitious Beliefs and Risk Intuitions on Genetic Test Decisions.

INTRODUCTION: Moving beyond numeric representations of risk perceptions, we examine cognitive causation, or superstitious thinking, and negative affect in risk as predictors of MC1R (i.e., moderate v. high risk) skin cancer genetic testing and responses to this testing. METHODS: Participants (N = 496) completed baseline assessments using validated measures of cognitive causation (beliefs that thinking about cancer risk increases cancer likelihood) and negative affect in risk (negative feelings generated during risk perception) and subsequently received a test offer. Participants could access a website to learn about and request genetic testing. Those who tested (n = 167) completed assessments of cognitive and affective reactions 2 wk after testing, including the Impact of Events-Revised Intrusive thoughts subscale. RESULTS: Those with higher negative affect in risk were less likely to return a saliva sample for testing (odds ratio = 0.98, 95% confidence interval = 0.96-0.99). Those with higher cognitive causation reported more fear (b = 0.28-0.31; P's < 0.05). Higher negative affect in risk was associated with more emotion-laden test responses, particularly in those receiving higher-risk as compared with average-risk results. CONCLUSION: Negative affect in risk did not hamper test information seeking, although it did inhibit the uptake of genetic testing. Those with higher cognitive causation showed more fear regarding their test result, as indicated by higher distress in those who received average-risk results and lower believability in those who received higher-risk results.

Comprehension of skin cancer genetic risk feedback in primary care patients.

Few studies have examined comprehension and miscomprehension of genetic risk feedback for moderate-risk genes in the general population. We examined the prevalence and nature of accurate and inaccurate genetic risk feedback comprehension among those who received genetic testing for melanocortin-1-receptor (MC1R) gene variants that confer moderate melanoma risk. Participants (N = 145 Albuquerque, NM) were tested as part of a randomized controlled trial. Two weeks after receiving MC1R genetic risk feedback, participants answered open-ended questions regarding their reactions to the MC1R feedback report. Participants' comprehension of their feedback (average-risk or higher-risk for melanoma) was evaluated through qualitative analysis of open-ended responses. Most participants demonstrated comprehension of their feedback results (i.e., 63% of average-risk participants [ARPs]; 51% of higher-risk participants [HRPs]). Miscomprehension was evident in fewer participants (i.e., 16% of ARPs, 11% of HRPs). A few ARPs misunderstood the purpose of testing, whereas a few HRPs reported confusion about the meaning of their risk feedback. Some participants' responses to the open-ended questions were too ambiguous to ascertain comprehension or miscomprehension (i.e., 21% of ARPs, 38% of HRPs). Taken together, these findings suggest that genetic testing feedback for MC1R risk variants is largely comprehensible to general population participants. This study adds to the work examining comprehension and usage of common, moderate risk genetic information in public health contexts. However, to maximize the utility of genetic risk information in the general population, further research is needed to investigate and address areas where common genetic risk feedback misunderstandings occur.

"Let's Talk about Skin Cancer": Examining Association between Family Communication about Skin Cancer, Perceived Risk, and Sun Protection Behaviors.

Family communication about skin cancer risk may motivate protective behaviors. However, it is unclear how widespread such communication might be. In this study, we describe prevalence and patterns (across environmental, personal, and behavioral factors) of family communication about skin cancer across N = 600 diverse (79% female, 48% Hispanic, 44% non-Hispanic White) primary care patients from Albuquerque, New Mexico, a geographical location with year-round sun exposure. Over half reported discussing general cancer (77%) and skin cancer risks (66%) with their families. The most frequent target of skin cancer risk communication included doctors (54%), followed by friends/coworkers (49%), spouse/partner (43%), other family members (38%), sisters (36%), mothers (36%), daughters (33%), sons (32%), father (24%), and brothers (22%). On average, participants reported having talked to three family members about skin cancer risks. The most frequently discussed content of skin cancer risk communication was the use of sun protection (89%), followed by the personal risk of skin cancer (68%), who had skin cancer in the family (60%), family risk of skin cancer (59%), time of sun exposure (57%), and skin cancer screening (57%). A family or personal history of cancer, higher perceived risk, higher health literacy, being non-Hispanic, having higher education or income, and proactive sun protective behavior were associated with greater family communication about general cancer and skin cancer risks. These study findings have implications for interventions that encourage discussions about skin cancer risk, sun protection, and skin cancer screening that lead to adoption of sun-safe behaviors.

Southwest Harvest for Health: An Adapted Mentored Vegetable Gardening Intervention for Cancer Survivors.

Harvest for Health is a home-based vegetable gardening intervention that pairs cancer survivors with Master Gardeners from the Cooperative Extension System. Initially developed and tested in Alabama, the program was adapted for the different climate, growing conditions, and population in New Mexico. This paper chronicles the feasibility, acceptability, and preliminary efficacy of "Southwest Harvest for Health". During the nine-month single-arm trial, 30 cancer survivor-Master Gardener dyads worked together to establish and maintain three seasonal gardens. Primary outcomes were accrual, retention, and satisfaction. Secondary outcomes were vegetable and fruit (V and F) intake, physical activity, and quality of life. Recruitment was diverse and robust, with 30 survivors of various cancers, aged 50-83, roughly one-third minority, and two-thirds females enrolled in just 60 days. Despite challenges due to the COVID-19 pandemic, retention to the nine-month study was 100%, 93% reported "good-to-excellent" satisfaction, and 87% "would do it again." A median increase of 1.2 servings of V and F/day was documented. The adapted home-based vegetable gardening program was feasible, well-received, and resulted in increased V and F consumption among adult cancer survivors. Future studies are needed to evaluate the effectiveness of this program and to inform strategies to increase the successful implementation and further dissemination of this intervention.

Behavioral and Psychological Outcomes Associated with Skin Cancer Genetic Testing in Albuquerque Primary Care.

Public availability of genetic information is increasing; thus, efforts to improve diversity in basic and translational research in genomics is a top priority. Given the increasing U.S. incidence and mortality of melanoma, and the prevalence of common melanocortin-1 receptor (MC1R) gene melanoma risk variants in the general population, we examined genomic testing of MC1R for skin cancer risk in a randomized controlled trial in Albuquerque, New Mexico primary care. Participants were 48% Hispanic and were randomized 5:1 to a MC1R test invitation or usual care. We assessed 3 month sun protection, skin cancer screening, and skin cancer worry outcomes associated with testing, and key effect moderators (e.g., cancer risk perceptions, and skin cancer risk factors). Our findings indicate that the primary outcomes were unchanged by the MC1R test offer, test acceptance, and level of risk feedback. Moderator analyses showed that those with lower risk perception, and those with skin that readily tans, significantly increased their sun protection in response to higher than average risk feedback. Risk feedback did not prompt cancer worry, and average risk feedback did not erode existing sun protection. This study paves the way for the development of tailored strategies to address low skin cancer risk awareness in this understudied context of public health genomics.

A sequential explanatory study of the employment experiences of population-based breast, colorectal, and prostate cancer survivors.

PURPOSE: Cancer treatment often leads to work disruptions including loss of income, resulting in long-term financial instability for cancer survivors and their informal caregivers. METHODS: In this sequential explanatory study, we conducted a cross-sectional survey of employment experiences among ethnically diverse, working-age individuals diagnosed with breast, colorectal, or prostate cancer. Following the survey, we conducted semi-structured interviews with cancer survivors and informal caregivers to explore changes in employment status and coping techniques to manage these changes. RESULTS: Among employed survivors (n = 333), cancer caused numerous work disruptions including issues with physical tasks (53.8%), mental tasks (46.5%) and productivity (76.0%) in the workplace. Prostate cancer survivors reported fewer work disruptions than female breast and male and female colorectal cancer survivors. Paid time off and flexible work schedules were work accommodations reported by 52.6% and 36.3% of survivors, respectively. In an adjusted regression analysis, household income was positively associated with having received a work accommodation. From the qualitative component of the study (survivors n = 17; caregivers n = 11), three key themes emerged: work disruptions, work accommodations, and coping mechanisms to address the disruptions. Survivors and caregivers shared concerns about lack of support at work and resources to navigate issues caused by changes in employment. CONCLUSIONS: This study characterized employment changes among a diverse group of cancer survivors. Work accommodations were identified as a specific unmet need, particularly among low-income cancer survivors. Addressing changes in employment among specific groups of cancer survivors and caregivers is critical to mitigate potential long-term consequences of cancer.

Southwest Harvest for Health: Adapting a mentored vegetable gardening intervention for cancer survivors in the southwest.

Few diet and physical activity evidence-based interventions have been routinely used in community settings to achieve population health outcomes. Adapting interventions to fit the implementation context is important to achieve the desired results. Harvest for Health is a home-based vegetable gardening intervention that pairs cancer survivors with certified Master Gardeners from the Cooperative Extension Service with the ultimate goal of increasing vegetable consumption and physical activity, and improving physical functioning and health-related quality-of-life. Harvest for Health has potential for widespread dissemination since Master Gardener Programs exist throughout the United States. However, state- and population-specific adaptations may be needed to improve intervention adoption by other Master Gardener Programs. Our primary objective was to adapt this evidence-informed intervention that was initially incepted in Alabama, for the drastically different climate and growing conditions of New Mexico using a recommended adaptation framework. Our secondary objective was to develop a study protocol to support a pilot test of the adapted intervention, Southwest Harvest for Health. The adaptation phase is a critical first step towards widespread dissemination, implementation, and scale-out of an evidence-based intervention. This paper describes the adaptation process and outcomes, and the resulting protocol for the ongoing pilot study that is currently following 30 cancer survivors and their paired Extension Master Gardener mentors.

Effects of health literacy skills, educational attainment, and level of melanoma risk on responses to personalized genomic testing.

OBJECTIVE: Few studies have examined how health literacy impacts responses to genetic information. METHODS: We examined this issue among 145 English or Spanish-speaking adult primary care patients enrolled in a trial that offered testing for MC1R gene variants that confer moderately increased melanoma risk. We investigated whether health literacy skills, educational attainment, or melanoma risk were related to short-term cognitive and affective responses to genetic test results. RESULTS: On average, participants found the test results to be highly believable and clear, with low levels of negative emotional responses and moderate levels of positive responses. In adjusted models, health literacy skills were significantly inversely associated with confusion (OR = 0.75, 95 % CI = 0.58, 0.96); those with higher education thought significantly less about their test results (ß = -0.66), were less hopeful (ß = -0.89), and had lower distress (ß = -1.15). We also observed a significant interaction (p < .001) between health literacy and melanoma risk in affecting the frequency of thoughts about test results. CONCLUSION: The findings indicate that health literacy skills may affect to what extent individuals elaborate cognitively on genetic information. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Patients with lower health literacy skills or education may need support in understanding genetic test results.

Food Insecurity and Forgone Medical Care Among Cancer Survivors.

PURPOSE: Financial hardship is increasingly understood as a negative consequence of cancer and its treatment. As patients with cancer face financial challenges, they may be forced to make a trade-off between food and medical care. We characterized food insecurity and its relationship to treatment adherence in a population-based sample of cancer survivors. METHODS: Individuals 21 to 64 years old, diagnosed between 2008 and 2016 with stage I-III breast, colorectal, or prostate cancer were identified from the New Mexico Tumor Registry and invited to complete a survey, recalling their financial experience in the year before and the year after cancer diagnosis. Multivariable logistic regression was used to estimate odds ratios (ORs) and 95%CIs. RESULTS: Among 394 cancer survivors, 229 (58%) were food secure in both the year before and the year after cancer diagnosis (persistently food secure), 38 (10%) were food secure in the year before and food insecure in the year after diagnosis (newly food insecure), and 101 (26%) were food insecure at both times (persistently food insecure). Newly food-insecure (OR, 2.82; 95% CI, 1.02 to 7.79) and persistently food-insecure (OR, 3.04; 95% CI,1.36 to 6.77) cancer survivors were considerably more likely to forgo, delay, or make changes to prescription medication than persistently food-secure survivors. In addition, compared with persistently food-secure cancer survivors, newly food-insecure (OR, 9.23; 95% CI, 2.90 to 29.3), and persistently food-insecure (OR, 9.93; 95% CI, 3.53 to 27.9) cancer survivors were substantially more likely to forgo, delay, or make changes to treatment other than prescription medication. CONCLUSION: New and persistent food insecurity are negatively associated with treatment adherence. Efforts to screen for and address food insecurity among individuals undergoing cancer treatment should be investigated as a strategy to reduce socioeconomic disparities in cancer outcomes.

Biobehavioral effects of Tai Chi Qigong in men with prostate cancer: Study design of a three-arm randomized clinical trial.

Fatigue is often one of the most commonly reported symptoms in prostate cancer survivors, but it is also one of the least understood cancer-related symptoms. Fatigue is associated with psychological distress, disruptions in sleep quality, and impairments in health-related quality of life. Moreover, inflammatory processes and changes related to the hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal (HPA) axis and/or autonomic nervous system may also play a role in cancer-related fatigue. Thus, effective treatments for fatigue in prostate cancer survivors represent a current unmet need. Prior research has shown that Tai Chi Qigong, a mind-body exercise intervention, can improve physical and emotional health. Herein, we describe the protocol of the ongoing 3-arm randomized controlled Health Empowerment & Recovery Outcomes (HERO) clincal trial. One hundred sixty-six prostate cancer survivors with fatigue are randomized to a modified Tai Chi Qigong intervention (TCQ), intensity-matched body training intervention (BT), or usual care (UC) condition. Guided by biopsychosocial and psychoneuroimmunology models, we propose that TCQ, as compared to BT or UC will: i) reduce fatigue (primary outcome) in prostate cancer survivors; ii) reduce inflammation; and iii) regulate the expression of genes from two major functional clusters: a) inflammation, vasodilation and metabolite sensing and b) energy and adrenergic activation. Assessments are conducted at baseline, the 6-week midpoint of the intervention, and 1 week, 3 months, and 12 months post-intervention. If our findings show that TCQ promotes recovery from prostate cancer and its treatment, this type of intervention can be integrated into survivorship care plans as the standard of care. The study's findings will also provide novel information about underlying biobehavioral mechanisms of cancer-related fatigue. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT03326713; clinicaltrials.gov.

MC1R Variation in a New Mexico Population.

BACKGROUND: The Melanocortin 1 Receptor (MC1R) contributes to pigmentation, an important risk factor for developing melanoma. Evaluating SNPs in MC1R and association with race/ethnicity, skin type, and perceived cancer risk in a New Mexico (NM) population will elucidate the role of MC1R in a multicultural population. METHODS: We genotyped MC1R in 191 NMs attending a primary care clinic in Albuquerque. We obtained individuals' self-identified race/ethnicity, skin type, and perceived cancer risk. We defined genetic risk as carriage of any one or more of the nine most common SNPs in MC1R. RESULTS: We found that one MC1R SNP, R163Q (rs885479), was identified in 47.6% of self-identified Hispanics and 12.9% of non-Hispanic whites (NHW), making Hispanics at higher "genetic risk" (as defined by carrying one of the MC1R common variants). When we deleted R163Q from analyses, Hispanics were no longer at higher genetic risk (33.3%) compared with NHW (48.3%), consistent with melanoma rates, tanning ability, and lower perceived risk. Hispanics had a perceived risk significantly lower than NHW and a nonsignificant better tanning ability than NHW. CONCLUSIONS: The R163Q variant in MC1R may not be a risk factor for melanoma among NM Hispanics. This suggestion points to the need to carefully interpret genetic risk factors among specific populations. IMPACT: Genetic risk cannot be extrapolated from Northern European populations directly to non-European populations.

Psychosocial and Cultural Determinants of Interest and Uptake of Skin Cancer Genetic Testing in Diverse Primary Care.

BACKGROUND: Translational research in genomics has limited reach and requires efforts to broaden access and utility in diverse populations. Skin cancer is common and rates are rising, including among Hispanics. Germline variants in the melanocortin-1 receptor (MC1R) gene are common in the population and confer moderate risk for melanoma and basal cell cancers across skin types. Feedback about MC1R risk status may promote skin cancer risk awareness and risk reduction. AIMS: We examined the level of interest in pursuing MC1R testing, and patterns of interest across skin cancer perceived threat and control attitudes, cultural beliefs (family influence on health, health system distrust, cancer fatalism, skin cancer misconceptions), and health literacy. METHODS: We used a study website to inform primary care patients in Albuquerque, NM about the benefits and drawbacks of MC1R testing. Website logon, request of a saliva test kit, and return of the test kit (yes vs. no) were primary assessments of study interest and uptake. RESULTS: Of 499 participants provided with a test offer, 33% requested and returned the test. Lower family influence on participants' health was an important factor both overall and within ethnicity subgroups, and may indicate that primary care patients interested in skin cancer genetic testing see themselves as proactive health seekers, independent from family encouragement. Lower self-efficacy for skin cancer prevention was also an important characteristic of those who tested. CONCLUSION: As evidence for common genetic markers for skin cancer accumulates, these findings suggest characteristics of those most likely to pursue genetic testing for skin cancer risk.