BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study is to evaluate the content validity of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network - Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - Breast Cancer Symptom Index (NFBSI-16) and the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) Physical Function Short Form 10b among patients with hormone receptor positive (HR+)/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 negative (HER2-) advanced breast cancer.
METHODS: Cognitive debriefing interviews sought to evaluate patients' ability to read, understand, and meaningfully respond to the questionnaires, as well as to evaluate the questionnaires' relevance in the target patient population. Interviews were conducted by telephone and lasted approximately 90 min. Audio recordings were transcribed, anonymized, and analyzed using qualitative data analysis software.
RESULTS: Fifteen cognitive debriefing interviews were conducted with women (mean age 66.0 years [standard deviation = 12.4]). Patients reported metastases in the bone (86.7%), liver (20.0%), lung (13.3%), skin (6.7%), and lymph node (6.7%) (not mutually exclusive). All patients for whom data were available demonstrated understanding of the instructions and the recall period of the NFBSI-16 (n = 14/14, 100.0%) and the PROMIS (n = 14/14, 100.0%). Greater than 90% of patients demonstrated understanding of each of the items in the NFBSI-16 and the PROMIS. Greater than 70% of patients demonstrated understanding of the response options of the NFBSI-16, > 90% understood response options of PROMIS Items 1-6, and ≥ 50% understood response options of PROMIS Items 7-10. Conceptual relevance was supported for most items in both questionnaires based on patients' reports of experiencing the concepts as part of their breast cancer experience.
CONCLUSIONS: The results of the cognitive debriefing interviews provide evidence that the NFBSI-16 and PROMIS Physical Function Short Form 10b have content validity in the HR+/HER2- advanced breast cancer patient population. Patients may benefit from additional instructions at the point the response options reverse direction in the PROMIS.

PURPOSE: Lung cancer is the leading cause of U.S. cancer deaths and radon is the second leading risk factor for lung cancer. By better understanding geologic variations of radon production in states, comprehensive cancer control efforts could be improved. The study purpose was to assess states with the greatest potential for elevated radon and the likelihood of radon-related actions in National Comprehensive Cancer Control Program (NCCCP) awardee cancer plans.
METHODS: Two state-level variables were derived to approximate potential for elevated radon using the Environmental Protection Agency county map and the 2015 U.S. Census. The association between radon potential and inclusion of radon activity within cancer plans was evaluated using logistic regression.
RESULTS: Fifty-one percent of cancer plans recognized an association between radon and cancer risk, and included measurable radon activities. Most states with high radon potential included radon activity in cancer plans. Both measures of radon potential were significantly associated with NCCCP cancer plans including radon activity.
CONCLUSIONS: Geospatial analyses help to prioritize radon-related lung cancer activities. In areas with high potential for radon exposure, increasing knowledge about potential for radon exposure may result in increased radon testing, mitigation, or other radon reducing strategies, and ultimately reduction of lung cancer deaths.

BACKGROUND: This article describes the development of an integrative survivorship program at an urban National Cancer Institute-designated comprehensive cancer center with three closely linked components: a Survivorship Clinic with dedicated staff, a network of Support Services including Wellness, and an Integrative Medicine Program.
DEVELOPMENT: We first defined the parameters of survivorship care and developed a patient-centric model that determined the optimal timeframes for transitioning these patients from the oncology clinic to a centralized survivorship clinic. Survivorship care includes the development of a survivorship care plan (SCP) for each patient at their initial visit to the program. Quality-of-life assessments are used in real time to guide clinical decision making to referrals to supportive care services, including educational events, expert consultations, and treatment using integrative and complementary therapies, access to legal services, community resource information, and support group activities for cancer survivors and caregivers. Integrative therapies were added to support the needs of this new program, including recruiting a nutritionist and acupuncturist, and developing a yoga, mindfulness, and Reiki program. Population served: As of June 2018, 908 people have accessed our survivorship clinic, receiving a complete clinical assessment and SCP. Patients are routinely referred to support services based on the individual needs and ongoing symptoms from treatment. The majority of referrals are made to acupuncture, Healing Touch or Reiki, nutrition, psychosocial oncology, and yoga.
CONCLUSIONS: Developing a successful integrative survivorship program requires some essential features, including institutional support, strong leadership, a clear vision of how the clinical program will function, a dedicated team that is willing to do what it takes to get the program off the ground, and clinical oncology champions to refer patients into the program. With the development of this program, this multimodal approach to patient-centric care is maintained throughout the spectrum of care, from diagnosis to survivorship.

This analysis aims to evaluate the performance characteristics of alternative baseline imaging thresholds in a cohort of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) patients from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database. HCC patients within the SEER database (2010-2015) who had complete information on clinical T and N stages as well as complete information on metastatic sites were eligible for the current study. Various performance characteristics associated with baseline imaging were investigated, including specificity, sensitivity, positive likelihood ratio (LR), negative LR, number needed to investigate (NNI), negative predictive value (NPV), positive predictive value (PPV), and accuracy. A total of 27,201 HCC patients were included. Based on current recommendations that advocate for the use of cross-sectional chest imaging in all newly diagnosed cases of HCC, these recommendations would yield a PPV of 5.0% for the detection of lung metastases. This would translate to an NNI of 20.0. When T1N0 patients were excluded from routine chest or bone imaging, this resulted in a PPV of 6.8% for the identification of lung metastases and an NNI of 14.7. Likewise, this translated to a PPV of 4.6% for the identification of bone metastases and an NNI of 21.7. Similarly, when patients with T1N0 disease and normal alpha-fetoprotein (AFP) were excluded from routine imaging, this resulted in a PPV of 5.6% for the identification of lung metastases and an NNI of 17.8. Also, this translated to a PPV of 3.8% for the identification of bone metastases and an NNI of 26.3. The current study suggests that the omission of routine baseline chest imaging may be considered in selected patients with asymptomatic early-stage HCC and normal AFP.

In order to celebrate the accomplishments of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's (CDC) National Comprehensive Cancer Control Program (NCCCP), the Comprehensive Cancer Control National Partners (CCCNP) developed this Special Issue on Cancer Causes and Control. This, the third Special Issue on Comprehensive Cancer Control (CCC), is a reflection of 20 years of building successful partnerships to prevent and control cancer; planning and implementing strategic cancer control; collaborating to address national cancer prevention and control priorities; evaluating efforts; sharing successes; and, in later years, serving as a model for global cancer control planning and implementation. The CDC currently supports cancer control planning and implementation in all 50 states, the District of Columbia, eight tribes or tribal organizations, and seven Pacific Island Jurisdictions and U.S. territories through the NCCCP. CCC is an approach that brings together multi-sector partners to address the cancer burden in a community collectively by leveraging existing resources and identifying and addressing cancer related issues and needs. The Comprehensive Cancer Control National Partnership (CCCNP), a partnership of national organizations, has been committed to supporting comprehensive cancer control efforts since 1999. We summarize the efforts described in this Special Issue. We also describe opportunities and critical elements to continue the momentum for comprehensive cancer control well into the future.

This paper explores how, through its extensive network of partners, the Comprehensive Cancer Control National Partnership (National Partnership) has provided a robust array of trainings, learning institutes, webinars, workshops, mentorship programs, and direct technical assistance to comprehensive cancer control programs and coalitions over the past 20 years. Mapping these activities to specific cancer control competencies revealed that the efforts of the National Partnership adequately address the core competencies necessary for an effective workforce and have the potential to increase practitioner capacity to adopt and implement evidence-based cancer control programs. Ensuring the continued availability and uptake of these tools, trainings and partnerships could potentially address gaps and barriers in the public health workforce related to evidence-based practice.

PURPOSE: Training clinical and supportive staff in quality improvement (QI) theory and use of QI tools has the potential to improve oncology care delivery. We report our combined experience of providing training to oncologists in a variety of local settings and assess the effect of the training on individual participants and for institutions.
METHODS: Multidisciplinary oncology teams at a comprehensive cancer center, an academic medical center, and community practices were led through experiential QI training that spanned several months. The curriculum included didactic training sessions that attendees applied to their local project-based work and that required plan-do-study-act cycles. The curriculum was adapted to the smaller practice setting through use of a workbook and a reduced focus on quantitative methods. All teams were supported by coaches and provided final presentations to leadership. The self-rated abilities of trainees to use 15 QI tools were assessed with a pre/post training survey that had five response categories (information, skill, knowledge, understanding, and wisdom). Local institutional and external project presentations were tracked.
RESULTS: During 7 years, 129 trainees participated in 56 QI projects. All of the 15 QI tools had 80% of trainees rate themselves in the top three categories (knowledge, understanding, and wisdom) after the training; none met this threshold before. Multiple projects were presented in institutional and external settings. Most projects targeted three of the four domains of the ASCO Quality Oncology Practice Initiative certification program standards.
CONCLUSIONS: We implemented and sustained QI training programs in a variety of cancer delivery settings. The flexible training model should be easily adoptable by others.

Comprehensive cancer control celebrated its twentieth anniversary in 2018. A dedicated group of national partners formed the Comprehensive Cancer Control National Partnership (CCCNP) at the same time that CDC's National Comprehensive Cancer Control Program was formed. The CCCNP has supported the development and growth of comprehensive cancer control from its inception. The CCCNP mirrors how coalitions function at the state, tribe, territory, and Pacific Island Jurisdiction level. We provide a national example of how 19 leading cancer organizations work together with a unified vision to support cancer control efforts in the United States (U.S.). What follows is an overview of the CCCNP, its vision, mission, and structure and a description of how this partnership has evolved over the past 20 years. The importance of collaboration is highlighted. Two states, South Dakota and Kansas, provide examples of how working with partners through the cancer coalition has advanced their state's cancer control agenda. Closing thoughts on the future work of the CCCNP are provided, including a continued focus on supporting health equity; better engagement and support of CCC coalition leaders; and informing efforts to develop a national cancer control plan for the United States.

The National Comprehensive Cancer Control Program has experienced exponential growth over the past 20 years due to the coordination and collaboration of many stakeholders to sustain multisector coalitions, develop and execute data-driven plans, and successfully implement evidenced-based interventions across the United States. These stakeholders have worked tirelessly to address the burden of cancer by employing strategies that promote healthy behaviors to reduce cancer risk, facilitate screening, and address the needs of cancer survivors. The interaction between the comprehensive cancer control program and the coalitions to engage in this work has been coined the 3Ps: the partnership, the CCC plan, and CCC program interventions. This article describes the efforts to evaluate the growth of the comprehensive cancer control movement, especially as it pertains to coalition contribution, plan priority development and implementation, and intervention implementation. It describes successes and lessons learned from an evaluation whose findings can be used to bolster and sustain comprehensive cancer control programs and coalitions across the U.S.

PURPOSE: Comprehensive cancer control (CCC) coalitions and programs have delivered effective models and approaches to reducing cancer burden across the United States over the last two decades. Communication plays an essential role in diverse coalition activities from prevention to survivorship, including organizational and community capacity-building and as cancer control intervention strategies.
METHODS: Based upon a review of published CCC research as well as public health communication best practices, this article describes lessons learned to assist CCC coalitions and programs with systematic implementation of communication efforts as key strategies in cancer control.
RESULTS: Communication-oriented lessons include (1) effective communication work requires listening and ongoing engagement with key stakeholders, (2) communication interventions should target multiple levels from interpersonal to mediated channels, (3) educational outreach can be a valuable opportunity to bolster coalition effectiveness and cancer control outcomes, and (4) dedicated support is necessary to ensure consistent communication efforts.
CONCLUSIONS: External and internal communication strategies can optimize coalition efforts and resources to ultimately help produce meaningful improvement in cancer control outcomes.

INTRODUCTION: In the early 1990s, a comprehensive cancer control (CCC) approach was developed in the United States (US). In 2003, the US-Affiliated Pacific Islands (USAPI) adopted the CCC approach through a regional coalition, the Cancer Council of the Pacific Islands (CCPI). Using the CCC approach, the CCPI developed jurisdiction-specific cancer coalitions and initiated their respective cancer plans.
METHODS: The evolution of the CCC approach and the history of the CCPI regional coalition are reviewed. The outcomes of the regional approach for cancer control in the USAPI are described to illustrate the possibilities, value-added and innovation of using a CCC strategy in a multi-national coalition based in a resource-limited environment.
RESULTS: The CCC approach enabled the CCPI to (1) harmonize cancer control efforts between the six USAPI jurisdictions, (2) represent the USAPI cancer needs as a single voice, and (3) develop a regional cancer control strategy. Outcomes include (1) a regional cancer registry, (2) three sequential regional CCC plans, (3) leveraged resources for the USAPI, (4) enhanced on-site technical assistance and training, (5) improved standards for cancer screening, (6) evidence-based cancer control interventions adapted for the USAPI.
CONCLUSION: The regional CCPI coupled with the CCC approach is an effective engine of change. The CCC strategies enabled navigation of the political, geographic, cultural, and epidemiologic Pacific environment. The regional partners have been able to harmonize cancer control efforts in resource-limited settings. Regional cancer coalitions may be effective in the global arena for cancer control between communities, states, or countries.

This article explores how comprehensive cancer control plans and partnerships have evolved, over the past 20 years, to meet the ever-changing environment of cancer prevention and control. This evolution has resulted in plans that take a more focused approach in identifying cancer-related priorities and coalitions with structures that have been redesigned to better engage a more wide-ranging group of partners to help address the priorities. Presented in this paper are examples from three states that describe how recognizing the need for change has led to improved processes in updating a cancer plan; strengthened and more diverse partnerships; and coalition sustainment by leveraging and maximizing resources.

The nine habits of successful comprehensive cancer control coalitions (Nine Habits) is a guide that outlines the key elements of successful comprehensive cancer control (CCC) coalitions. The guide was developed under the auspices of the Comprehensive Cancer Control National Partnership (CCCNP) and is based on evaluation including a literature review, qualitative and quantitative data collection from high-performing comprehensive cancer control coalitions. Comprehensive cancer control coalitions are made up of key stakeholders who come together to create a shared vision and shared plans to fight cancer, improve health outcomes, and reduce the burden from cancer. The CCCNP produced this guide to help coalitions maintain the health of their coalition efforts by providing tools to examine the key elements of successful coalitions, including leadership, membership, organizational structure, shared resources, and efforts in planning and communications. This paper provides information on how the guide was used by two states to rebuild their coalition and ultimately improve their efforts in improving health outcomes and reducing cancer burden. Lastly, the paper outlines future efforts to continue to support CCC coalitions in their work.

PURPOSE: As of 2016, an estimated 15.5 million cancer survivors were living in the United States and the number of cancer survivors is expected to increase to 20.3 million by 2026. Numerous clinical studies have shown that comorbidities, such as obesity and diabetes, and unhealthy lifestyle choices, such as physical inactivity and heavy smoking, negatively influence overall quality of life and long-term survival of cancer survivors. Accordingly, survivorship programs seek to focus on overall wellness, including symptom management, monitoring for late effects of treatment, monitoring for recurrence, helping patients adapt healthy behaviors, and quality of life. This paper provides a broad overview of public health efforts to address the needs of cancer survivors.
METHODS: To describe a range of examples of survivorship initiatives in comprehensive cancer control, we analyzed documents from comprehensive cancer control programs and coalitions and solicited detailed examples from several national partners.
RESULTS: Comprehensive cancer control programs, coalitions, and partners are undertaking myriad initiatives to address cancer survivorship and building upon evidence-based interventions to promote healthy behaviors for cancer survivors across the country.
CONCLUSION: A coordinated public health approach to caring for the growing population of cancer survivors can help address the long-term physical, psychosocial, and economic effects of cancer treatment on cancer survivors and their families.

INTRODUCTION: Hepatitis B virus (HBV) and hepatitis C virus (HCV) infections are risk factors for hepatocellular carcinoma, a type of primary liver cancer, and are most prevalent in people born 1945-1965. Relatively little information is available for liver cancer prevention, compared to other cancers. In this review, we provide a summary of current promising public health practices for liver cancer prevention from the literature, as well as liver cancer-related initiatives in the National Comprehensive Cancer Control Program (NCCCP).
METHODS: Two types of source materials were analyzed for this review: published literature (2005-present), and current cancer plans from the NCCCP (2005-2022). A search strategy was developed to include a review of several scientific databases. Of the 73 articles identified as potentially eligible, 20 articles were eligible for inclusion in the review. Eligible articles were abstracted using a data abstraction tool. Three independent keyword searches on 65 NCCCP plans were conducted. Keyword searches within each of the plans to identify activities related to liver cancer were conducted. Relevant information was abstracted from the plans and saved in a data table.
RESULTS: Of the 20 eligible articles, 15 articles provided information on interventions related to liver cancer and hepatitis B or hepatitis C prevention. All 15 of the intervention articles were related to hepatitis; 13 were hepatitis B-focused, two were hepatitis C-focused, and 14 focused on Asian/Pacific Islander American populations. The independent keyword search of NCCCP plans produced 46 results for liver, 27 results for hepatitis, and 52 results for alcohol. Two plans included activities related to liver cancer. Twenty-four plans included activities related to hepatitis.
DISCUSSION: A majority of the intervention articles published focused on HBV infection in Asian/Pacific Islander American populations, and a small percentage of NCCCP plans included liver-related content. The findings from this review will inform the development of an Action Plan on liver cancer prevention for the NCCCP, which will assist programs with the adoption and uptake of promising practices for the prevention of liver cancer.

Achieving health equity requires addressing social determinants of health. Promoting health equity as it relates to cancer control is one of six priorities of the National Comprehensive Cancer Control Program (NCCCP). This article describes recent activities implemented by three NCCCP awardees (North-west Portland Area Indian Health Board, Kansas, Michigan) and the CDC-funded National Behavior Health Network (NBHN), whose aim is to reduce health disparities among those with mental health and/or substance disorders. North-west Portland administered tribal surveys to help better understand tribal cancer-related risk factors, health behaviors, provide baseline data to support their cancer plan, and obtain resources for targeted interventions. Kansas established a health equity workgroup with a vision of addressing health equity through implementation and uptake of activities among all Kansans. Michigan provided trainings in health equity and social justice and developed health equity learning labs. As a result of the successful implementation of the NBHN's Community of Practice, individuals currently living with mental illness and/or substance disorders have had increased access to tobacco cessation and other cancer support services. These efforts and key opportunities for public health practitioners and their partners to increase engagement in cancer health equity are summarized in this article.

PURPOSE: Consultation to palliative care (PC) services in hospitalized patients is frequently late after admission to a hospital. The purpose of this study is to examine the association of in-hospital mortality and timing of palliative care consultation in cancer patients admitted through the emergency department (ED) of MD Anderson Cancer Center.
METHODS: Institutional databases were queried for unique medical admissions over a period of 1 year. Primary cancer type, ED versus direct admission, length of stay (LOS), presenting symptoms, and in-hospital mortality were reviewed; patient data were analyzed, and risk factors for in-hospital mortality were identified. The association of early palliative care consultation (within 3 days of admission) with these outcomes was studied. Descriptive statistics and multivariate logistic regression model were used.
RESULTS: Equal numbers of patients were admitted directly versus through the ED (7598 and 7538 respectively). However, of all patients who died in the hospital, 990 (88%) were admitted through the ED, compared with 137 admitted directly (P < 0.001). Patients who died in the hospital had longer median LOS compared with patients who were discharged alive (11 vs. 4 days, respectively, P < 0.001). Early palliative care consultation was associated with decreased mortality, compared with late consultation (P < 0.001). Chief complaints of respiratory problems, neurologic issues, or fatigue/weakness were significantly associated with in-hospital mortality.
CONCLUSION: We found an association between ED admission and hospital mortality. Decedent cancer patients had a prolonged LOS, and early palliative care consultation for terminally ill symptomatic patients may prevent in-hospital mortality and improve quality of cancer care.

Medical assistance in dying (maid) is a new medical service in Canada. Access to maid for patients with advanced cancer can be daunting during periods of declining health near the end of life. In this report, we describe a collaborative approach between the centralized coordination service and a regional cancer centre as an effective strategy for enabling interdisciplinary care delivery and enhancing patient-centred care at the end of the patient's cancer journey.

A diagnosis of cancer and its treatment often have a profound impact on an individual's health-related quality of life-affecting physical, psychological, social, occupational, and financial domains. Person-centered care (PCC)-defined as a respectful, responsive, and tailored approach that meets patients' needs, values, and preferences-is becoming an integral part of comprehensive cancer care. The implementation of PCC into clinical practice provides benefits such as improvement in the quality of patient care, enhanced health-related outcomes, and significantly higher satisfaction with care. However, to guide and document more precisely the effects of PCC, various authors have argued that a more comprehensive measurement framework is needed. The primary goal of this paper is to present such an evolving framework based on extant evidence and developed in the context of a series of expert stakeholder meetings spearheaded by the Canadian Partnership Against Cancer (CPAC) that began in 2012. Developed collaboratively, the Cancer Experience Measurement Framework goes beyond existing patient experience frameworks by focusing on four key elements and related measures: the patient perspective, the family perspective, the combined patient-family perspective, and interactions with the healthcare system. In light of current healthcare trends promoting cancer self-management, patients as partners, and patient and family engagement in care, it is imperative that we conduct ongoing assessments using shared and psychometrically sound measures to ensure sound comparisons across settings, as well as better cancer-related processes and outcomes for indivduals affected by cancer.

BACKGROUND: The National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guidelines provide recommendations for staging of prostate cancer patients in the objective regarding presence of locoregional lymph node metastases (LNM) and bone metastases. We tested the performance characteristics of these recommendations in a community setting.
METHODS: Within the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database (2004-2014), we identified patients with available Gleason, clinical stage and prostatic specific antigen. Performance characteristics endpoints consisted of sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NVP), overall accuracy and the number needed to image (NNI).
RESULTS: Totally, 191,308 patients were assessable for the validation of the LNM staging recommendations. Sensitivity ranged from 80.6 to 86.3%, specificity from 74.7 to 79.3%, PPV from 7.8 to 8.0%, overall accuracy from 75.0 to 79.3% and NPV was 99.5%. The respective NNI values were 12.5 and 12.8. 197,408 patients were assessable for the validation of bone scan recommendations. These recommendations resulted in 90.8% sensitivity, 76.3% specificity, PPV of 5.7%, NPV of 99.8% and overall accuracy of 76.5%. The NNI was 17.5.
CONCLUSION: The NCCN recommendations for locoregional LNM miss few patients with clinical LNM (0.3-0.4%) and provide a virtually perfect NPV of 99.5%. Also, the recommendations for bone scan miss a marginal number of patients with established bone metastases (0.14%) and yield a virtually perfect NPV of 99.8%.

BACKGROUND: Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer-related deaths in the United States, and radon exposure is the second leading risk factor. Fewer than 25% of existing U.S. homes have been tested for radon, and only 5-10% of new homes use some form of radon prevention.
OBJECTIVE: This qualitative study sought to determine radon-related knowledge, attitudes, and practices among Realtors to inform cancer control activities at local and state levels.
METHODS: We conducted focus groups with Realtors in four states to collect information about knowledge, attitudes, and practices regarding radon.
RESULTS: Realtors reported obtaining information on radon in similar ways, being aware of radon and its characteristics, and dealing with radon issues as a normal part of home sales. Differences in attitudes toward testing varied across states. Realtors in states with radon policies generally expressed more positive attitudes toward testing than those in states without policies. Radon mitigation was identified as an added expense to buyers and sellers. Realtors cited concerns about the reliability and credibility of mitigation systems and installers.
CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest that attitudes and practices vary among Realtors and that additional educational resources about radon as a cancer risk factor may be beneficial. When comprehensive cancer control programs update their plans, they may want to add objectives, strategies, or activities to reduce radon exposure and prevent lung cancer. These activities could include partnering with Realtors to improve their knowledge, attitudes, and practices about radon, as well as developing and distributing radon educational resources.

OBJECTIVE: To assess compliance with, and outcomes related to, the Society of Gynecologic Oncology quality measure in ovarian cancer to administer chemotherapy within 42 days of cytoreductive surgery in patients with epithelial ovarian/fallopian tube/peritoneal cancer.
METHODS: Institutional ovarian cancer database was evaluated for compliance with the quality measure to administer chemotherapy within 42 days of cytoreductive surgery. The influence of chemotherapy timing on the risk of death was evaluated, and factors related to the timing of chemotherapy after surgery was assessed.
RESULTS: Of 668 patients with epithelial ovarian/fallopian tube/peritoneal cancer who underwent surgical treatment for their disease (primary or interval), 635 met criteria for administration of adjuvant chemotherapy (with stages IA/IB, grade 2 or 3 disease; stage IC or more advanced stage disease). Compliance to administer chemotherapy within 42 days was 59.1%. The adjusted risk of death was not strongly associated with time to chemotherapy within 42 days (aHR: 0.80; 0.61, 1.05) and this did not differ by primary or interval debulking surgery.
CONCLUSIONS: In this prospectively maintained database, 59.1% of patients received chemotherapy within 42 days of surgery. The time to chemotherapy interval of within 42 days was not strongly associated with improved survival, particularly when age, stage of disease, insurance enrollment and surgical characteristics were taken into account. Further, the relationship between time to chemotherapy interval of within 42 days and survival did not vary by patients who received primary versus interval debulking surgery or had no residual disease.

OBJECTIVE: The study aimed to assess cancer patients' use of psychological care and its correlates in a large sample of cancer patients in Comprehensive Cancer Centers (CCCs) in Germany.
METHODS: In a multicenter study in Germany, cancer patients with various diagnoses were evaluated for self-reported use of psychological support. We measured psychological distress, depression and anxiety, quality of life, and social support with standardized questionnaires and analyzed its association with the utilization of psychological care using multivariable logistic regression. This paper focuses on a cross-sectional analysis of the data assessed during inpatient care.
RESULTS: Three thousand fifty-four (50%) of hospitalized patients were asked for participation, and n = 1632 (53.6%) participated. We were able to analyze n = 1,398 (45.9%) patients. Three hundred ninety-seven (28.4%) of the sample utilized psychological support. Users of psychological care were significantly younger than nonusers (odds ratio [OR]: 0.967, P < 0.001) and were more often female (OR: 1.878, P < 0.001), whereas educational level was not associated with the use of psychological care. In the multivariable analysis, effects on the use of psychological care were observed for Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) anxiety (OR: 1.106, P = 0.001) and both subscales of the 12-item Short Form Health Survey (SF-12) quality of life measure (mental, OR: 0.97, P = 0.002; physical, OR: 0.97, P = 0.002).
CONCLUSION: Psychological distress and anxiety are higher, and quality of life is lower in users of psychological care in comparison with nonusers during inpatient cancer treatment. Although psychooncological services should be provided to all patients who need them, special efforts should be made to reach populations that report low utilization.

OBJECTIVES: The objectives of this study were to define dietary supplement (DS) use by cancer patients and to investigate factors associated with DS use during cancer treatment.
METHODS: A cross-sectional survey of adults diagnosed with breast, colorectal, lung, or prostate cancer in 2010-2012 at the University of North Carolina Comprehensive Cancer Center was conducted. Questionnaires were sent to 1794 patients. Phone calls were made to nonrespondents. The authors described type of DS use before, during, and after initial cancer treatment, source of advice on DS use, and used logistic regression to investigate the association of DS use during or after cancer treatment with clinical/sociodemographic characteristics and source of advice.
RESULTS: Six hundred and three (34%) patients completed the questionnaires. Nonvitamin nonmineral DS use during initial cancer treatments was common: any cancer treatment (49%), chemotherapy (52%), and radiation therapy (51%). Among patients seeking advice on DS use, 75% reported professional sources, 44% reported media sources, and 47% reported lay sources. DS use during cancer treatment was strongly predicted by prior DS use, followed by prior complementary therapies' use, receiving DS advice from a cancer care provider, being female, and higher education level.
CONCLUSION: DS use is common and persists during cancer treatment. Among DS users during treatment, 18% used an herbal supplement, which are likely to carry greater risk of interaction with chemotherapy agents compared with vitamin, mineral, and other supplements. Although many respondents sought DS advice from professional sources, the use of nonprofessional sources remains high.

OBJECTIVES/HYPOTHESIS: The current role of maxillofacial prosthetic care for head and neck cancer patients is not well understood. Additionally, perceived barriers for service provision are unknown. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the current role of maxillofacial prosthetic care at National Cancer Institute (NCI)-designated comprehensive cancer centers and to identify perceived barriers to care.
STUDY DESIGN: Multicenter, cross-sectional survey of head and neck division leaders at NCI-designated comprehensive cancer centers.
METHODS: Each head and neck division leader from the 47 NCI-designated comprehensive cancer centers was invited to participate. The main outcomes of this study were: 1) to evaluate the current role of maxillofacial prosthetics for the surgically treated head and neck cancer patient within NCI-designated comprehensive cancer centers and 2) to identify perceived barriers to care. Measured outcomes were obtained from an anonymous online survey and reported.
RESULTS: Twenty-eight of the 47 head and neck service chiefs responded (60% response rate). Respondents expressed preference for prosthetic rehabilitation for hard palate/upper gum, auricular, and nasal defects. Local flap or free tissue transfer was preferred for lower gum and soft palate defects. Cost-related factors were among the most reported perceived barriers to maxillofacial prosthetic care.
CONCLUSIONS: Maxillofacial prosthetics have an important role in the rehabilitation of the head and neck cancer patient. Perceived barriers for services exist, particularly as it relates to cost. Providers should be aware that these issues are likely to be more severe in regional or community centers.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: NA Laryngoscope, 129:409-414, 2019.

BACKGROUND: Complementary and integrative health approaches such as yoga provide support for psychosocial health. We explored the effects of group-based yoga classes offered through an integrative medicine center at a comprehensive cancer center.
METHODS: Patients and caregivers had access to two yoga group classes: a lower intensity (YLow) or higher intensity (YHigh) class. Participants completed the Edmonton Symptom Assessment System (ESAS; scale 0-10, 10 most severe) immediately before and after the class. ESAS subscales analyzed included global (GDS; score 0-90), physical (PHS; 0-60), and psychological distress (PSS; 0-20). Data were analyzed examining pre-yoga and post-yoga symptom scores using paired t-tests and between types of classes using ANOVAs.
RESULTS: From July 18, 2016, to August 8, 2017, 282 unique participants (205 patients, 77 caregivers; 85% female; ages 20-79 years) attended one or more yoga groups (mean 2.3). For all participants, we observed clinically significant reduction/improvement in GDS, PHS, and PSS scores and in symptoms (ESAS decrease ≥1; means) of anxiety, fatigue, well-being, depression, appetite, drowsiness, and sleep. Clinically significant improvement for both patients and caregivers was observed for anxiety, depression, fatigue, well-being, and all ESAS subscales. Comparing yoga groups, YLow contributed to greater improvement in sleep versus YHigh (-1.33 vs -0.50, P = .054). Improvement in fatigue for YLow was the greatest mean change (YLow -2.12).
CONCLUSION: A single yoga group class resulted in clinically meaningful improvement of multiple self-reported symptoms. Further research is needed to better understand how yoga class content, intensity, and duration can affect outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Over 16,000 women are diagnosed with a human papillomavirus (HPV)-associated gynecologic cancer every year. Because most of these cancers are preventable, correct and appropriate information about the HPV vaccine and cervical cancer screening can help reduce incidence.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention created Inside Knowledge: Get the Facts About Gynecologic Cancer campaign materials, which were used by seven National Comprehensive Cancer Control Program recipients in tailored educational sessions on gynecologic cancer with women and healthcare providers in the community setting. Session participants completed presession and postsession questionnaires. Differences in knowledge and intentions were assessed using chi-square tests for women in the general public, obstetricians/gynecologists (OB/GYNs), primary care physicians (PCPs), and other healthcare providers.
RESULTS: Women's knowledge improved significantly presession to postsession that HPV causes vaginal (39%-65%, p < 0.001) and vulvar cancers (26%-60%, p < 0.001), but postsession few women correctly identified all HPV-associated gynecologic cancers (15%). From presession to postsession, more women were able to correctly identify recommended age groups for whom the HPV vaccine is recommended (15%-30%, p < 0.001), and that the Pap test only screens for cervical cancer (58%-73%, p < 0.001). Among providers, OB/GYNs had more baseline knowledge of HPV-associated gynecologic cancers than other providers. Postsession, PCPs and other providers increased their knowledge of HPV vaccine recommended age groups (33%-71% and 23%-61%, respectively), and the 3-year recommended screening interval for the Pap test (73%-91% and 63%-85%, respectively). HPV vaccine knowledge did not show significant improvement among OB/GYNs postsessions.
CONCLUSIONS: Women and healthcare providers who attended the Inside Knowledge sessions significantly improved their knowledge of HPV-associated gynecologic cancers. Additional educational activities during the sessions that support distinguishing between HPV-associated versus other gynecologic cancers and clarify HPV vaccine recommendations may help with further increases in knowledge.

Global cancer centres operate across different sizes, scales, and ecosystems. Understanding the essential aspects of the creation, organisation, accreditation, and activities within these settings is crucial for developing an affordable, equitable, and quality cancer care, research, and education system. Robust guidelines are scarce for cancer units, cancer centres, and comprehensive cancer centres in low-income and middle-income countries. However, some robust examples of the delivery of complex cancer care in centres in emerging economies are available. Although it is impossible to create an optimal system to fit the unique needs of all countries for the delivery of cancer care, we summarise what has been published about the development and management of cancer centres in low-income and middle-income countries so far and highlight the need for clinical and political leadership.

The goal of this paper is to review and describe the characteristics and outcomes of ethics consultations on a gastrointestinal oncology service and to identify areas for systems improvement and staff education. This is a retrospective case series derived from a prospectively-maintained database (which includes categorization of the primary issues, contextual ethical issues, and other case characteristics) of the ethics consultation service at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center. The study analyzed all ethics consultations requested for patients on the gastrointestinal medical oncology service from September 2007 to January 2016. A total of 64 patients were identified. The most common primary ethical issue was the DNR order (39%), followed by medical futility (28%). The most common contextual issues were dispute/conflict between staff and family (48%), dispute/conflict intra-family (16%), and cultural/ethnic/religious issues (16%). The majority of ethical issues leading to consultation were resolved (84%); i.e., the patient, surrogate, and/or healthcare team followed the recommendation of the ethics consultant. 22% had a DNR order prior to the ethics consult and 69% had a DNR order after the consult. In this population of patients on a gastrointestinal oncology service, ethics consultations are most often called regarding patients with advanced cancers and the most common ethical conflicts arose between families and the health care team over goals of care at the end of life, specifically related to the DNR order and perceived futility of continued/escalation of treatment. Ethics consultations assisted with conflict resolution. Conflicts might be reduced with improved communication about prognosis and earlier end of life care planning.

The objective of this retrospective analysis was to describe the development and implementation of an anesthesiologist-led multidisciplinary committee to evaluate high-risk surgical patients in order to improve surgical appropriateness. The study was conducted in an anesthesia preoperative evaluation clinic at an academic comprehensive cancer center. One hundred sixty-seven high-risk surgical patients with cancer-related diagnoses were evaluated and discussed at a High-Risk Committee (HRC) meeting to determine surgical appropriateness and optimize perioperative care. The HRC is an anesthesiologist-led model for multidisciplinary review of high-risk patients developed at Roswell Park Comprehensive Cancer Center. The group of high-risk patients in which surgery was not performed had, on average, a greater percentage of hypertension, smoking history, dyspnea, heart failure, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, diabetes, renal failure, and sleep apnea than the group in whom surgery was performed. Only one of 107 high-risk patients who had surgery died within the first 30 days after surgery. A smaller percentage of patients died in the group that had surgery versus the group in which surgery was canceled. For all patients discussed by the HRC, the mortality was less than 2% within the first 30 days after the HRC.