Survival of Dopaminergic Amacrine Cells after Near-Infrared Light Treatment in MPTP-Treated Mice

We examined whether near-infrared light (NIr) treatment (photobiomodulation) saves dopaminergic amacrine cells of the retina in an acute and a chronic 1-methyl-4-phenyl-1,2,3,6-tetrahydropyridine (MPTP) mouse model of Parkinson disease. For the acute model, BALB/c mice had MPTP (100 mg/kg) or saline injections over 30 hours, followed by a six-day-survival period. For the chronic model, mice had MPTP (200 mg/kg) or saline injections over five weeks, followed by a three-week-survival period. NIr treatment was applied either at the same time (simultaneous series) or well after (posttreatment series) the MPTP insult. There were four groups within each series: Saline, Saline-NIr, MPTP, and MPTP-NIr. Retinae were processed for tyrosine hydroxylase (TH) immunochemistry, and cell number was analysed. In the MPTP groups, there was a significant reduction in TH+ cell number compared to the saline controls; this reduction was greater in the acute (~50%) compared to the chronic (~30%) cases. In the MPTP-NIr groups, there were significantly more TH+ cells than in the MPTP groups of both series (~30%). In summary, we showed that NIr treatment was able to both protect (simultaneous series) and rescue (posttreatment series) TH+ cells of the retina from parkinsonian insult

Patterns of Cell Activity in the Subthalamic Region Associated with the Neuroprotective Action of Near-Infrared Light Treatment in MPTP-Treated Mice

We have shown previously that near-infrared light (NIr) treatment or photobiomodulation neuroprotects dopaminergic cells in substantia nigra pars compacta (SNc) from degeneration induced by 1-methyl-4-phenyl-1,2,3,6-tetrahydropyridine (MPTP) in mice. The present study explores whether NIr treatment changes the patterns of Fos expression in the subthalamic region, namely, the subthalamic nucleus (STN) and zona incerta (ZI); both cell groups have abnormally overactive cells in parkinsonian cases. BALB/c mice were treated with MPTP (100–250 mg/kg) or saline either over 30 hours followed by either a two-hour or six-day survival period (acute model) or over five weeks followed by a three-week survival period (chronic model). NIr and MPTP were applied simultaneously. Brains were processed for Fos immunochemistry, and cell number was estimated using stereology. Our major finding was that NIr treatment reduced (30–45%) the increase in Fos+ cell number evident in the STN and ZI after MPTP insult. This reduction was concurrent with the neuroprotection of dopaminergic SNc cells shown previously and was evident in both MPTP models (except for the 2 hours survival period which showed no changes in cell number). In summary, our results indicated that NIr had long lasting effects on the activity of cells located deep in the brain and had repaired partially the abnormal activity generated by the parkinsonian toxin

Individual-level factors associated with COVID-19 vaccine acceptance among U.S. patients with cancer

Vaccine hesitancy in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic is a major public health concern in the US. Cancer patients are especially vulnerable to adverse COVID-19 outcomes and require targeted prevention efforts against COVID-19. We used longitudinal survey data from patients seen at Moffitt Cancer Center to identify attitudes, beliefs, and sociodemographic factors associated with COVID-19 vaccination acceptance among cancer patients. Patients with confirmed invasive cancer diagnosis through Cancer Registry data were asked about vaccine acceptance through the question "Now that a COVID-19 vaccine is available, are you likely to get it?" and dichotomized into high accepters (already received it, would get it when available) and low accepters (waiting for a doctor to recommend it, waiting until more people received it, not likely to get it). Most patients (86.8% of 5,814) were high accepters of the COVID-19 vaccine. High accepters had more confidence in the effectiveness and safety of the vaccine than low accepters. Multivariable logistic regression showed older individuals (70-89 vs.18-49: OR:2.57, 95% CI:1.33-4.86), those with greater perceived severity of COVID-19 infection (very serious vs. not at all serious: OR:2.55, 95% CI:1.76-3.70), practicing more risk mitigation behaviors (per one standard deviation OR:1.75, 95% CI:1.57-1.95), and history of receiving the flu shot versus not (OR:6.56, 95% CI:5.25-8.20) had higher odds of vaccine acceptance. Individuals living with more than one other person (vs. alone: OR: 0.53, 95% CI: 0.35, 0.79) and those who were more socioeconomically disadvantaged (per 10 percentile points: OR: 0.89, 95 %CI: 0.85, 0.93) had lower odds of reporting vaccine acceptance. Most patients with cancer have or would receive the COVID-19 vaccine. Those who are less likely to accept the vaccine have more concerns regarding effectiveness and side effects, are younger, more socioeconomically disadvantaged, and have lower perceptions of COVID-19 severity

Factors associated with self-reported social isolation among patients with cancer during the COVID-19 pandemic

We aimed to identify patient-level demographic and behavioral characteristics associated with higher social isolation among patients with cancer throughout the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Moffitt Cancer Center patients seen on or after January 1, 2015, had a last known alive vital status, a valid e-mail address, and were 18-89 years old, were emailed a survey regarding social isolation. We collected information on age, sex, race, ethnicity, marital status, smoking, self-reported cancer diagnosis, cancer treatment, and perceived life changes due to the COVID-19 pandemic. We calculated a COVID-19 risk mitigation score by summing the frequency of risk mitigation behaviors (e.g., mask wearing). Social isolation was assessed with the self-reported Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) Social Isolation Short Form. Logistic regression models compared characteristics of participants reporting higher versus lower social isolation (T-scores >60 vs. ≤60). Most participants (N = 9,579) were female (59.2%), White (93.0%), and non-Hispanic (92.5%). Participants at greater odds of higher social isolation were younger (per 10 years decrease odds ratio [OR] = 1.36, 95% confidence interval, CI [1.30, 1.43]), female (vs. male OR = 1.54, 95% CI [1.36, 1.74]), unmarried (vs. married OR = 1.83, 95% CI [1.62, 2.08]), current smokers (vs. never OR = 2.38, 95% CI [1.88, 3.00]), reporting more risk mitigation behaviors (per 1 SD; OR = 1.33, 95% CI [1.24, 1.42]), and more perceived life changes (vs. little/no change; OR = 2.64, 95% CI [2.08, 3.35]). We identified younger age, females, unmarried, current smokers, more risk mitigation behaviors, and more perceived life changes increased odds of social isolation for patients with cancer during the COVID-19 pandemic. This can inform identification of patients with cancer at higher risk of social isolation for targeted mitigation strategies. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved)

Improving Electronic Survey Response Rates Among Cancer Center Patients During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Mixed Methods Pilot Study

Background: Surveys play a vital role in cancer research. During the COVID-19 pandemic, the use of electronic surveys is crucial to improve understanding of the patient experience. However, response rates to electronic surveys are often lower compared with those of paper surveys. Objective: The aim of this study was to determine the best approach to improve response rates for an electronic survey administered to patients at a cancer center during the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods: We contacted 2750 patients seen at Moffitt Cancer Center in the prior 5 years via email to complete a survey regarding their experience during the COVID-19 pandemic, with patients randomly assigned to a series of variations of prenotifications (ie, postcard, letter) or incentives (ie, small gift, modest gift card). In total, eight combinations were evaluated. Qualitative interviews were conducted to understand the level of patient understanding and burden with the survey, and quantitative analysis was used to evaluate the response rates between conditions. Results: A total of 262 (9.5%) patients completed the survey and 9 participated in a qualitative interview. Interviews revealed minimal barriers in understanding or burden, which resulted in minor survey design changes. Compared to sending an email only, sending a postcard or letter prior to the email improved response rates from 3.7% to 9.8%. Similarly, inclusion of an incentive significantly increased the response rate from 5.4% to 16.7%, especially among racial (3.0% to 12.2%) and ethnic (6.4% to 21.0%) minorities, as well as among patients with low socioeconomic status (3.1% to 14.9%). Conclusions: Strategies to promote effective response rates include prenotification postcards or letters as well as monetary incentives. This work can inform future survey development to increase response rates for electronic surveys, particularly among hard-to-reach populations

Development and initial psychometric evaluation of a COVID-related psychosocial experiences questionnaire for cancer survivors

Cancer survivors are at elevated risk of psychological problems related to COVID-19, yet no published measure adequately assesses their psychosocial experiences during the pandemic.Describe the development and factor structure of a comprehensive, self-report measure (COVID-19 Practical and Psychosocial Experiences questionnaire [COVID-PPE]) assessing the pandemic's impact on US cancer survivors.The sample (n = 10,584) was divided into three groups to assess COVID-PPE factor structure by conducting: (1) initial calibration/exploratory analysis of the factor structure of 37 items (n = 5070), (2) confirmatory factor analysis of the best-fitting model (36 items after item removal; n = 5140), and (3) post-hoc confirmatory analysis with an additional six items not collected in the first two groups (42 items; n = 374).The final COVID-PPE was divided into two sets of subscales, conceptualized as Risk Factors and Protective Factors. The five Risk Factors subscales were labeled Anxiety Symptoms, Depression Symptoms, Health Care Disruptions, Disruptions to Daily Activities and Social Interactions, and Financial Hardship. The four Protective Factors subscales were labeled Perceived Benefits, Provider Satisfaction, Perceived Stress Management Skills, and Social Support. Internal consistency was acceptable for seven subscales (αs = 0.726-0.895; ωs = 0.802-0.895) but poor or questionable for the remaining two subscales (αs = 0.599-0.681; ωs = 0.586-0.692).To our knowledge, this is the first published self-report measure comprehensively capturing psychosocial impact-both positive and negative-of the pandemic on cancer survivors. Future work should evaluate predictive utility of COVID-PPE subscales, particularly as the pandemic evolves, which may inform recommendations for cancer survivors and facilitate identification of survivors most in need of intervention

Factors associated with changes in exercise behaviors during the COVID-19 pandemic

PURPOSE: There is limited information on how the COVID-19 pandemic has changed health behaviors among cancer patients. We examined changes in exercise behaviors since the pandemic and identified characteristics associated with these changes among cancer patients. METHODS: Cancer patients (n = 1,210) completed a survey from August to September 2020 to assess COVID-19 pandemic-related changes in health behaviors and psychosocial factors. Patients were categorized into three groups: exercising less, exercising did not change, and exercising more. Patient characteristics were compared by exercise groups. RESULTS: One-third of the patients reported a decreased amount of regular exercise, while 10% reported exercising more during the pandemic. Patients who exercised less were more likely to be unemployed/retired and have poor health status and psychosocial stressors such as disruptions in daily life while less likely to be former smokers (all p < 0.05). In contrast, patients who exercised more were younger, had stage IV diagnosis, and also reported disruptions in daily life (all p < 0.05). Patients who were living in rural areas were also more likely not to experience changes in exercise habits (all p < 0.05), although rural–urban status was not identified as a strong predictor. CONCLUSION: A significant proportion of cancer patients experienced changes in exercise habits, especially exercising less, during the first 6 months of the COVID-19 pandemic. Age, employment status, tumor stage, health status, smoking status, and psychosocial factors were associated with changes in exercise behaviors. Our results highlight the importance of promoting physical activity guidelines for cancer survivorship during the COVID-19 pandemic and may help improve the identification of cancer patients susceptible to exercising less

Impact of the COVID‐19 pandemic on rural and urban cancer patients' experiences, health behaviors, and perceptions

PURPOSE: The COVID‐19 pandemic has disrupted many facets of life. We evaluated pandemic‐related health care experiences, COVID‐19 prevention behaviors and measures, health behaviors, and psychosocial outcomes among rural and urban cancer patients. METHODS: Among 1,472 adult cancer patients, who visited Huntsman Cancer Institute in the past 4 years and completed a COVID‐19 survey (August‐September 2020), we assessed the impact of the pandemic on medical appointments, prevention/health behaviors, and psychosocial factors, stratified by urbanicity. FINDINGS: Mean age was 61 years, with 52% female, 97% non‐Hispanic White, and 27% were residing in rural areas. Rural versus urban patients were more likely to be older, not employed, uninsured, former/current smokers, consume alcohol, and have pandemic‐related changes/cancellations in surgery appointments (all P<.05). Changes/cancellations in other health care access (eg, doctor's visits) were also common, particularly among urban patients. Urban versus rural patients were more likely to socially distance, use masks and hand sanitizer, and experience changes in exercise habits and in their daily lives (all P<.05). Less social interaction and financial stress were common among cancer patients but did not differ by urbanicity. CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest that the COVID‐19 pandemic had a substantial impact on cancer patients, with several challenges specific to rural patients. This comprehensive study provides unique insights into the first 6 months of COVID‐19 pandemic‐related experiences and continuity of care among rural and urban cancer patients predominantly from Utah. Further research is needed to better characterize the pandemic's short‐ and long‐term effects on rural and urban cancer patients and appropriate interventions

Risk factors and health behaviors associated with loneliness among cancer survivors during the COVID-19 pandemic

Loneliness may exacerbate poor health outcomes particularly among cancer survivors during the COVID-19 pandemic. Little is known about the risk factors of loneliness among cancer survivors. We evaluated the risk factors of loneliness in the context of COVID-19 pandemic-related prevention behaviors and lifestyle/psychosocial factors among cancer survivors. Cancer survivors (n = 1471) seen at Huntsman Cancer Institute completed a survey between August-September 2020 evaluating health behaviors, medical care, and psychosocial factors including loneliness during COVID-19 pandemic. Participants were classified into two groups: 'lonely' (sometimes, usually, or always felt lonely in past month) and 'non-lonely' (never or rarely felt lonely in past month). 33% of cancer survivors reported feeling lonely in the past month. Multivariable logistic regression showed female sex, not living with a spouse/partner, poor health status, COVID-19 pandemic-associated lifestyle factors including increased alcohol consumption and marijuana/CBD oil use, and psychosocial stressors such as disruptions in daily life, less social interaction, and higher perceived stress and financial stress were associated with feeling lonely as compared to being non-lonely (all p < 0.05). A significant proportion of participants reported loneliness, which is a serious health risk among vulnerable populations, particularly cancer survivors. Modifiable risk factors such as unhealthy lifestyle behaviors and psychosocial stress were associated with loneliness. These results highlight the need to screen for unhealthy lifestyle factors and psychosocial stressors to identify cancer survivors at increased risk of loneliness and to develop effective management strategies