The National Cancer Institute’s Community Networks Program Initiative to Reduce Cancer Health Disparities: Outcomes and Lessons Learned

We describe reach, partnerships, products, benefits, and lessons learned of the 25 Community Network Programs (CNPs) that applied community-based participatory research (CBPR) to reduce cancer health disparities

Effect of Hydrocortisone on Mortality and Organ Support in Patients With Severe COVID-19: The REMAP-CAP COVID-19 Corticosteroid Domain Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Evidence regarding corticosteroid use for severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is limited. Objective: To determine whether hydrocortisone improves outcome for patients with severe COVID-19. Design, Setting, and Participants: An ongoing adaptive platform trial testing multiple interventions within multiple therapeutic domains, for example, antiviral agents, corticosteroids, or immunoglobulin. Between March 9 and June 17, 2020, 614 adult patients with suspected or confirmed COVID-19 were enrolled and randomized within at least 1 domain following admission to an intensive care unit (ICU) for respiratory or cardiovascular organ support at 121 sites in 8 countries. Of these, 403 were randomized to open-label interventions within the corticosteroid domain. The domain was halted after results from another trial were released. Follow-up ended August 12, 2020. Interventions: The corticosteroid domain randomized participants to a fixed 7-day course of intravenous hydrocortisone (50 mg or 100 mg every 6 hours) (n = 143), a shock-dependent course (50 mg every 6 hours when shock was clinically evident) (n = 152), or no hydrocortisone (n = 108). Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end point was organ support-free days (days alive and free of ICU-based respiratory or cardiovascular support) within 21 days, where patients who died were assigned -1 day. The primary analysis was a bayesian cumulative logistic model that included all patients enrolled with severe COVID-19, adjusting for age, sex, site, region, time, assignment to interventions within other domains, and domain and intervention eligibility. Superiority was defined as the posterior probability of an odds ratio greater than 1 (threshold for trial conclusion of superiority >99%). Results: After excluding 19 participants who withdrew consent, there were 384 patients (mean age, 60 years; 29% female) randomized to the fixed-dose (n = 137), shock-dependent (n = 146), and no (n = 101) hydrocortisone groups; 379 (99%) completed the study and were included in the analysis. The mean age for the 3 groups ranged between 59.5 and 60.4 years; most patients were male (range, 70.6%-71.5%); mean body mass index ranged between 29.7 and 30.9; and patients receiving mechanical ventilation ranged between 50.0% and 63.5%. For the fixed-dose, shock-dependent, and no hydrocortisone groups, respectively, the median organ support-free days were 0 (IQR, -1 to 15), 0 (IQR, -1 to 13), and 0 (-1 to 11) days (composed of 30%, 26%, and 33% mortality rates and 11.5, 9.5, and 6 median organ support-free days among survivors). The median adjusted odds ratio and bayesian probability of superiority were 1.43 (95% credible interval, 0.91-2.27) and 93% for fixed-dose hydrocortisone, respectively, and were 1.22 (95% credible interval, 0.76-1.94) and 80% for shock-dependent hydrocortisone compared with no hydrocortisone. Serious adverse events were reported in 4 (3%), 5 (3%), and 1 (1%) patients in the fixed-dose, shock-dependent, and no hydrocortisone groups, respectively. Conclusions and Relevance: Among patients with severe COVID-19, treatment with a 7-day fixed-dose course of hydrocortisone or shock-dependent dosing of hydrocortisone, compared with no hydrocortisone, resulted in 93% and 80% probabilities of superiority with regard to the odds of improvement in organ support-free days within 21 days. However, the trial was stopped early and no treatment strategy met prespecified criteria for statistical superiority, precluding definitive conclusions. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02735707

Effect of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor and angiotensin receptor blocker initiation on organ support-free days in patients hospitalized with COVID-19

IMPORTANCE Overactivation of the renin-angiotensin system (RAS) may contribute to poor clinical outcomes in patients with COVID-19. Objective To determine whether angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitor or angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB) initiation improves outcomes in patients hospitalized for COVID-19. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS In an ongoing, adaptive platform randomized clinical trial, 721 critically ill and 58 non–critically ill hospitalized adults were randomized to receive an RAS inhibitor or control between March 16, 2021, and February 25, 2022, at 69 sites in 7 countries (final follow-up on June 1, 2022). INTERVENTIONS Patients were randomized to receive open-label initiation of an ACE inhibitor (n = 257), ARB (n = 248), ARB in combination with DMX-200 (a chemokine receptor-2 inhibitor; n = 10), or no RAS inhibitor (control; n = 264) for up to 10 days. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES The primary outcome was organ support–free days, a composite of hospital survival and days alive without cardiovascular or respiratory organ support through 21 days. The primary analysis was a bayesian cumulative logistic model. Odds ratios (ORs) greater than 1 represent improved outcomes. RESULTS On February 25, 2022, enrollment was discontinued due to safety concerns. Among 679 critically ill patients with available primary outcome data, the median age was 56 years and 239 participants (35.2%) were women. Median (IQR) organ support–free days among critically ill patients was 10 (–1 to 16) in the ACE inhibitor group (n = 231), 8 (–1 to 17) in the ARB group (n = 217), and 12 (0 to 17) in the control group (n = 231) (median adjusted odds ratios of 0.77 [95% bayesian credible interval, 0.58-1.06] for improvement for ACE inhibitor and 0.76 [95% credible interval, 0.56-1.05] for ARB compared with control). The posterior probabilities that ACE inhibitors and ARBs worsened organ support–free days compared with control were 94.9% and 95.4%, respectively. Hospital survival occurred in 166 of 231 critically ill participants (71.9%) in the ACE inhibitor group, 152 of 217 (70.0%) in the ARB group, and 182 of 231 (78.8%) in the control group (posterior probabilities that ACE inhibitor and ARB worsened hospital survival compared with control were 95.3% and 98.1%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE In this trial, among critically ill adults with COVID-19, initiation of an ACE inhibitor or ARB did not improve, and likely worsened, clinical outcomes. TRIAL REGISTRATION ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT0273570

The Evolution of Palliative Care within the American Indian Health System

Palliative care is now considered an important quality component within cancer care and essential to the continuum of cancer care programs nationwide.  American Indian and Alaska Native patients have significant differences in mortality from various cancers, and therefore palliative care is very important while working in parallel towards improved survival overall. In fact, palliative care has in some circumstances even contributed to improved survival (Annual report to the Nation on the status of cancer 1975-2009. DOI:10.1093/jnci/djs491). This article recounts the efforts made over many years to institute quality palliative care programs that are culturally acceptable to Native populations and outlines “next steps”. &nbsp

Health Disparities, Cancer among the Haudenosaunee, New York State

Identifying health status and disparities for Indigenous populations is the first logical step toward better health. We compare the mortality profile of the American Indian and Alaska Native (AI/AN) population with that of non-Hispanic whites in the Haudenosaunee Nations in New York State, the Indian Health Service (IHS) East region (Nashville Area) and the United States. Data from the linkage of IHS registration records with decedents from the National Death Index (1990-2009) were used to identify AI/AN deaths misclassified as non-AI/AN. Analyses were limited to persons of non-Hispanic origin. We analyzed trends for 1990-2009 and compared AI/AN and white persons in the Haudenosaunee Nations in New York State, IHS East region and the United States. All-cause death rates over the past two decades for Haudenosaunee men declined at a greater percentage per year than for AI/AN men in the East region and United States. This decrease was not observed for Haudenosaunee women with all-cause death rates appearing to be stable over the past two decades. Haudenosaunee all-cause death rates were 16% greater than that for whites in the Haudenosaunee Nations. The most prominent disparities between Haudenosaunee and whites are concentrated in the 25-44 year age group (Risk Ratio=1.85). Chronic liver disease, diabetes, unintentional injury, and kidney disease death rates were higher in Haudenosaunee than in whites in the Haudenosaunee Nations. The Haudenosaunee cancer death rate (180.8 per 100,000) was higher than that reported for AI/AN in the East (161.5 per 100,000).  Haudenosaunee experienced higher rates for the majority of the leading causes of death than East AI/AN. These results highlight the importance of Haudenosaunee-specific data to target prevention efforts to address health disparities and inequalities in health

The National Cancer Institute's Community Networks Program Initiative to Reduce Cancer Health Disparities: Outcomes and Lessons Learned.

BackgroundWe describe reach, partnerships, products, benefits, and lessons learned of the 25 Community Network Programs (CNPs) that applied community-based participatory research (CBPR) to reduce cancer health disparities.MethodsQuantitative and qualitative data were abstracted from CNP final reports. Qualitative data were grouped by theme.ResultsTogether, the 25 CNPs worked with more than 2,000 academic, clinical, community, government, faith-based, and other partners. They completed 211 needs assessments, leveraged funds for 328 research and service projects, trained 719 new investigators, educated almost 55,000 community members, and published 991 articles. Qualitative data illustrated how use of CBPR improved research methods and participation; improved knowledge, interventions, and outcomes; and built community capacity. Lessons learned related to the need for time to nurture partnerships and the need to attend to community demand for sustained improvements in cancer services.ImplicationsFindings demonstrate the value of government-supported, community-academic, CBPR partnerships in cancer prevention and control research