Mentoring, Training, and Scholarly Productivity Experiences of Cancer-Related Health Disparities Research Trainees: Do Outcomes Differ for Underrepresented Scientists?

The study aims to explore variation in scholarly productivity outcomes by underrepresented status among a diverse sample of researchers in a community-engaged training program. We identified 141 trainees from a web-based survey of researchers in the National Cancer Institute-funded, Community Networks Program Centers (CNPCs) (2011-2016). We conducted a series of multiple logistic regression models to estimate the effect of National Institutes of Health (NIH)-defined underrepresented status on four, self-reported, scholarly productivity outcomes in the previous 5 years: number of publications (first-authored and total) and funded grants (NIH and any agency). Sixty-five percent (n = 92) indicated NIH underrepresented status. In final adjusted models, non-NIH underrepresented (vs. underrepresented) trainees reported an increased odds of having more than the median number of total publications (> 9) (OR = 3.14, 95% CI 1.21-8.65) and any grant funding (OR = 5.10, 95% CI 1.77-14.65). Reporting ≥ 1 mentors (vs. none) was also positively associated (p < 0.05) with these outcomes. The CNPC underrepresented trainees had similar success in first-authored publications and NIH funding as non-underrepresented trainees, but not total publications and grants. Examining trainees' mentoring experiences over time in relation to scholarly productivity outcomes is needed

Evaluation of Patient Assistance Program Eligibility and Availability for Top 200 Brand Name and Generic Drugs in the United States

One strategy to encourage uninsured and underinsured patients' compliance with medication regimen is to refer them to pharmaceutical industry-sponsored patient assistance programs (PAPs). In order to receive the requested medications, patients should be qualified based on the program eligibility requirements. The purpose of this study was to examine PAP eligibility criteria for the most commonly dispensed prescriptions in the United States. We identified 136 unique chemical entities in the Top 200 drug list and 111 (82%) of these pharmaceutical products were offered by PAPs. Among the available medications, 69 (62%) were brand name; 29 (26%) were generic, and 13 (12%) had both brand name/generic forms. In terms of the availability of types of drugs (brand name vs. generic) provided by PAPs, differences in PAP eligibility requirements were found for citizenship (p < 0.001), permanent residency (p < 0.001), and prescription drug coverage (p< 0.001), but not for income limits (p= 0.051). Overall, PAPs could help low-income patients to obtain necessary medications; however, U.S. citizenship/permanent residency and restriction on prescription coverage are more likely to be required for brand name drugs rather than for generics. PAPs also provide some options for the underinsured and those with private insurance or Medicare Part D plan that offers inadequate prescription coverage.   Type: Original Researc

Improving Adherence to Adjuvant Hormonal Therapy Among Disadvantaged Women Diagnosed With Breast Cancer in South Carolina: Proposal for a Multimethod Study

Background: Current clinical guidelines recommend that hormone receptor-positive breast cancer survivors take adjuvant hormonal therapy (AHT) for 5 to 10 years, following the end of definitive treatment. However, fewer than half of patients adhere to the guidelines, and suboptimal adherence to AHT is associated with an increased risk of breast cancer mortality. Research has extensively documented sociodemographic and disease-specific factors associated with adherence to AHT, but very little evidence exists on behavioral factors (eg, knowledge, patient-provider communication) that can be modified and targeted by interventions. Objective: The goal of this study is to develop and test a theory-based, multilevel intervention to improve adherence to AHT among breast cancer survivors from racially and socioeconomically disadvantaged backgrounds (eg, Medicaid-insured). The specific aims are to (1) explore multilevel (eg, patient, health care system) factors that influence adherence to AHT; (2) develop a theory-based, multilevel intervention to improve adherence to AHT; and (3) pilot test and evaluate the intervention developed in Aim 2. Methods: For Aim 1, we will recruit breast cancer survivors and health care professionals to participate in semistructured interviews to gain their perspectives about barriers and facilitators to AHT use. We will conduct a directed content analysis of the Aim 1 qualitative interview data. For Aim 2, we will integrate Aim 1 findings and current literature into the design of a multilevel intervention using an Intervention Mapping approach. For Aim 3, we will recruit Medicaid-insured breast cancer survivors to assess the feasibility of the pilot intervention. Results: From May 2016 to July 2018, we completed interviews with 19 breast cancer survivors and 23 health care professionals in South Carolina. We will conduct a directed content analysis of the qualitative interview data. Results from this analysis will be used, in combination with current literature, to design (Aim 2) and pilot test a theory-based multilevel intervention (Aim 3) in Summer 2021. Results of the pilot are expected for Fall 2021. Conclusions: This study will provide a deeper understanding of how to improve adherence to AHT, using a novel and multilevel approach, among socioeconomically disadvantaged breast cancer survivors who often experience disproportionate breast cancer mortality

Using medical expenditure panel survey data to explore the relationship between patient-centered medical homes and racial disparities in severe maternal morbidity outcomes

Background: There are persistent racial/ethnic disparities in the occurrence of severe maternal morbidity. Patient-centered medical home care has the potential to address disparities in maternal outcomes. Objectives: To examine (1) the association between receiving patient-centered medical home care and severe maternal morbidity outcomes and (2) the interaction of race/ethnicity on patient-centered medical home status and severe maternal morbidity. Design/Methods: Using 2007 to 2016 data from the Medical Expenditures Panel Survey, we conducted a cross-sectional study to estimate the association between receipt of care from a patient-centered medical home and the occurrence of severe maternal morbidity, and racial-specific (White, Black, Asian, Other) relative risks of severe maternal morbidity. Our study used race as a proxy measure for exposure racism. We identified mothers (⩾15 years) who gave birth during the study period. We identified patient-centered medical home qualities using 11 Medical Expenditures Panel Survey questions and severe maternal morbidities using medical claims, and calculated generalized estimating equation models to estimate odds ratios of severe maternal morbidity and 95% confidence intervals. Results: Among all mothers who gave birth ( N  = 2801; representing 5,362,782 US lives), only 25% received some exposure patient-centered medical home care. Two percent experienced severe maternal morbidity, and this did not differ statistically ( p  = 0.11) by patient-centered medical home status. However, our findings suggest a 85% decrease in the risk of severe maternal morbidity among mothers who were defined as always attending a patient-centered medical home (odds ratios: 0.15; 95% confidence interval:0.01–1.87; p  = 0.14) and no difference in the risk of severe maternal morbidity among mothers who were defined as sometimes attending a patient-centered medical home (odds ratios: 1.00; 95% confidence interval:0.16–6.42; p  = 1.00). There was no overall interaction effect in the model between race and patient-centered medical home groups ( p  = 0.82), or ethnicity and patient-centered medical home groups ( p  = 0.62) on the severe maternal morbidity outcome. Conclusion: While the rate of severe maternal morbidity was similar to US rates, few mothers received care from a patient-centered medical home which may be due to underreporting. Future research should further investigate the potential for patient-centered medical home-based care to reduce odds of severe maternal morbidity across racial/ethnic groups

Racial/Ethnic disparities in health care receipt among male cancer survivors.

ObjectivesWe examined racial/ethnic disparities in health care receipt among a nationally representative sample of male cancer survivors.MethodsWe identified men aged 18 years and older from the 2006-2010 National Health Interview Survey who reported a history of cancer. We assessed health care receipt in 4 self-reported measures: primary care visit, specialist visit, flu vaccination, and pneumococcal vaccination. We used hierarchical logistic regression modeling, stratified by age (< 65 years vs ≥ 65 years).ResultsIn adjusted models, older African American and Hispanic survivors were approximately twice as likely as were non-Hispanic Whites to not see a specialist (odds ratio [OR] = 1.78; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.19, 2.68 and OR = 2.09; 95% CI = 1.18, 3.70, respectively), not receive the flu vaccine (OR = 2.21; 95% CI = 1.45, 3.37 and OR = 2.20; 95% CI = 1.21, 4.01, respectively), and not receive the pneumococcal vaccine (OR = 2.24; 95% CI = 1.54, 3.24 and OR = 3.10; 95% CI = 1.75, 5.51, respectively).ConclusionsRacial/ethnic disparities in health care receipt are evident among older, but not younger, cancer survivors, despite access to Medicare. These survivors may be less likely to see specialists, including oncologists, and receive basic preventive care

Navigation programs relevant for African American men with prostate cancer: a scoping review protocol.

BackgroundThe excess incidence and mortality due to prostate cancer that impacts African American men constitutes the largest of all cancer disparities. Patient navigation is a patient-centered healthcare system intervention to eliminate barriers to timely, high-quality care across the cancer continuum and improves health outcomes among vulnerable patients. However, little is known regarding the extent to which navigation programs include cultural humility to address prostate cancer disparities among African American men. We present a scoping review protocol of an in-depth examination of navigation programs in prostate cancer care-including navigation activities/procedures, training, and management-with a special focus on cultural context and humility for African American men to achieve health equity.MethodsWe will conduct comprehensive searches of the literature in PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and CINAHL Complete, using keywords and index terms (Mesh and Emtree) within the three main themes: prostate cancer, patient navigation, and African American men. We will also conduct a search of the gray literature, hand-searching, and reviewing references of included papers and conference abstracts. In a two-phase approach, two authors will independently screen titles and abstracts, and full-text based on inclusion/exclusion criteria. All study designs will be included that present detailed data about the elements of navigation programs, including intervention content, navigator training, and/or management. Data will be extracted from included studies, and review findings will be synthesized and summarized.DiscussionA scoping review focused on cultural humility in patient navigation within the context of eliminating disparities in PCa care among African American men does not yet exist. This review will synthesize existing evidence of patient navigation programs for African American prostate cancer patients and the inclusion of cultural humility. Results will inform the development and implementation of future programs to meet the unique needs of vulnerable prostate cancer patients in safety net settings.Systematic review registrationPROSPERO 2021 CRD42021221412

Mentoring and Training of Cancer-Related Health Disparities Researchers Committed to Community-Based Participatory Research.

Background and objectiveThe National Cancer Institute's (NCI) Community Networks Program Centers (CNPCs) provide community-based participatory research (CBPR)-oriented mentoring and training to prepare early-stage/midcareer investigators and student trainees (trainees) in disparities reduction. This paper describes the academic, mentoring, training, and work-life balance experiences of CNPC-affiliated trainees.MethodsWe used a collaborative and iterative process to develop a 57-item, web-based questionnaire completed by trainees from the 23 CNPCs between August 2012 and February 2013. Their CNPC mentors completed a 47-item questionnaire. Descriptive statistics were calculated.ResultsThe final analytic sample included 189 of 269 individuals (70%) identified as active participants in CNPC research or training/mentoring. Mentors (n=45) were mostly non-Hispanic White (77.8%) and 48.9% were male. Mentors published a median of 6 (interquartile range [IQR], 3-12) first-authored and 15 (IQR, 6-25) senior authored manuscripts, and secured 15 (IQR, 11-29) grants from the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and other sources in the previous 5 years. Most trainees (n=144) were female (79.2%), 43.7% were underrepresented racial/ethnic minorities, and 36.8% were first-generation college graduates. Over the previous 5 years, trainees reported a median of 4 (IQR, 1-6) publications as first author and 4 (IQR, 2-8) as co-author; 27.1% reported having one or more NIH R01s. Trainees reported satisfaction with their CNPC mentor (79.1%) and confidence in demonstrating most CBPR competencies.ConclusionThe CNPC training program consists of a scientifically productive pool of mentors and trainees. Trainees reported rates of scholarly productivity comparable to other national training programs and provided insights into relationships with mentors, academic pressures, and professional-personal life balance

Mentoring and Training of Cancer-Related Health Disparities Researchers Committed to Community-Based Participatory Research

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: The National Cancer Institute’s (NCI) Community Networks Program Centers (CNPCs) provide community-based participatory research (CBPR)-oriented mentoring and training to prepare early-stage/midcareer investigators and student trainees (trainees) in disparities reduction. This paper describes the academic, mentoring, training, and work–life balance experiences of CNPC-affiliated trainees. METHODS: We used a collaborative and iterative process to develop a 57-item, web-based questionnaire completed by trainees from the 23 CNPCs between August 2012 and February 2013. Their CNPC mentors completed a 47-item questionnaire. Descriptive statistics were calculated. RESULTS: The final analytic sample included 189 of 269 individuals (70%) identified as active participants in CNPC research or training/mentoring. Mentors (n = 45) were mostly non-Hispanic White (77.8%) and 48.9% were male. Mentors published a median of 6 (interquartile range [IQR], 3–12) first-authored and 15 (IQR, 6–25) senior authored manuscripts, and secured 15 (IQR, 11–29) grants from the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and other sources in the previous 5 years. Most trainees (n = 144) were female (79.2%), 43.7% were underrepresented racial/ethnic minorities, and 36.8% were first-generation college graduates. Over the previous 5 years, trainees reported a median of 4 (IQR, 1–6) publications as first author and 4 (IQR, 2–8) as co-author; 27.1% reported having one or more NIH R01s. Trainees reported satisfaction with their CNPC mentor (79.1%) and confidence in demonstrating most CBPR competencies. CONCLUSION: The CNPC training program consists of a scientifically productive pool of mentors and trainees. Trainees reported rates of scholarly productivity comparable to other national training programs and provided insights into relationships with mentors, academic pressures, and professional–personal life balance