The United States National Cancer Institute's Coordinated Research Effort on Tobacco Use as a Major Cause of Morbidity and Mortality among People with HIV.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Implications
This Commentary describes a National Cancer Institute-led initiative to advance the science and practice of treating tobacco use among PWH, which is now responsible for more life years lost than HIV. We describe the scope of the problem, the objectives of the initiative, and a summary of the seven funded studies. Harmonization of data across projects will provide information related to treatment mediators and moderators that was not previously possible. Stakeholders interested in tobacco cessation, including researchers, clinicians and public health officials, should be aware of this initiative and the evidence-base it will generate to advance tobacco treatment among this high-risk population.
SUBMITTER: Ashare RL
PROVIDER: S-EPMC7454816 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:IntroductionIn 2005, the National Cancer Institute funded the Community Networks Program (CNP), which aimed to reduce cancer health disparities in minority racial/ethnic and underserved groups through community-based participatory research, education, and training. The purpose of this study was to describe the CNP model and their tobacco-related work in community-based research, education, and training using a tobacco disparities research framework.MethodsWe conducted a comprehensive review of the CNP tobacco-related activities including publications, published abstracts, research activities, trainee pilot studies, policy-related activities, educational outreach, and reports produced from 2005-2009. Two authors categorized the tobacco-related activities and publications within the framework.ResultsAlthough there was no mandate to address tobacco, the CNPs produced 103 tobacco-related peer-reviewed publications, which reflects the largest proportion (12%) of all CNP cancer-related publications. Selected publications and research activities were most numerous under the framework areas "Psychosocial Research," "Surveillance," "Epidemiology," and "Treatment of Nicotine Addiction." Thirteen CNPs participated in tobacco control policymaking in mainstream efforts that affected their local community and populations, and 24 CNPs conducted 1147 tobacco-related educational outreach activities. CNP activities that aimed to build research and infrastructure capacity included nine tobacco-related pilot projects representing 16% of all CNP cancer-related pilot projects, and 17 publications acknowledging leveraged partnerships with other organizations, a strategy encouraged by the CNP.ConclusionsThe CNP is a promising academic-community model for working to eliminate tobacco-related health disparities. Future efforts may address scientific gaps, consider collaboration across groups, assess the extent of operationalizing community-based participatory research, and improve common tracking measures.
| S-EPMC4542844 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe US faces remarkable food and nutrition challenges. A new federal effort to strengthen and coordinate nutrition research could rapidly generate the evidence base needed to address these multiple national challenges. However, the relevant characteristics of such an effort have been uncertain.ObjectivesOur aim was to provide an objective, informative summary of 1) the mounting diet-related health burdens facing our nation and corresponding economic, health equity, national security, and sustainability implications; 2) the current federal nutrition research landscape and existing mechanisms for its coordination; 3) the opportunities for and potential impact of new fundamental, clinical, public health, food and agricultural, and translational scientific discoveries; and 4) the various options for further strengthening and coordinating federal nutrition research, including corresponding advantages, disadvantages, and potential executive and legislative considerations.MethodsWe reviewed government and other published documents on federal nutrition research; held various discussions with expert groups, advocacy organizations, and scientific societies; and held in-person or phone meetings with >50 federal staff in executive and legislative roles, as well as with a variety of other stakeholders in academic, industry, and nongovernment organizations.ResultsStark national nutrition challenges were identified. More Americans are sick than are healthy, largely from rising diet-related illnesses. These conditions create tremendous strains on productivity, health care costs, health disparities, government budgets, US economic competitiveness, and military readiness. The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outbreak has further laid bare these strains, including food insecurity, major diet-related comorbidities for poor outcomes from COVID-19 such as diabetes, hypertension, and obesity, and insufficient surveillance on and coordination of our food system. More than 10 federal departments and agencies currently invest in critical nutrition research, yet with relatively flat investments over several decades. Coordination also remains suboptimal, documented by multiple governmental reports over 50 years. Greater harmonization and expansion of federal investment in nutrition science, not a silo-ing or rearrangement of existing investments, has tremendous potential to generate new discoveries to improve and sustain the health of all Americans. Two identified key strategies to achieve this were as follows: 1) a new authority for robust cross-governmental coordination of nutrition research and other nutrition-related policy and 2) strengthened authority, investment, and coordination for nutrition research within the NIH. These strategies were found to be complementary, together catalyzing important new science, partnerships, coordination, and returns on investment. Additional complementary actions to accelerate federal nutrition research were identified at the USDA.ConclusionsThe need and opportunities for strengthened federal nutrition research are clear, with specific identified options to help create the new leadership, strategic planning, coordination, and investment the nation requires to address the multiple nutrition-related challenges and grasp the opportunities before us.
| S-EPMC7454258 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background: Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) remains a leading cause of disability and death in the United States. The "COPD in the United States" project gathered data about the impact of COPD to highlight variability across states and provide a single point of access to data for state decision makers, the public health community and advocates. This report provides a summary of COPD-related morbidity and mortality in the United States and individual states during 2014-2015 (some metrics contain data from other years). Methods: We used data from multiple sources ( the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System [BRFSS], the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) Wide-ranging ONline Data for Epidemiologic Research online database, the CDC's chronic disease indicators data, Centers from Medicare and Medicaid Services Chronic Conditions Data Warehouse, Medical Expenditures Panel Survey and the American Association of Cardiovascular and Pulmonary Rehabilitation Pulmonary Rehabilitation Directory) to estimate 10 national and state-specific COPD metrics (prevalence, hospitalizations and emergency department visits, 30-day hospital readmissions, mortality, vaccinations, smoking prevalence, per capita medical cost, and the number of COPD patients per a pulmonary rehabilitation program) and to calculate average score across the 10 metrics. Additionally, we used BRFSS data to calculate the prevalence of common comorbid diseases among people who also report having a diagnosis of COPD. Results: During 2014-2015, 5.9% of adults (more than 15.9 million) reported having been told by their health care professional that they had COPD. The age-adjusted prevalence ranged from 3.7% for Puerto Rico and Hawaii, to 12% for West Virginia. The average score, 1 being best and 5 being worst, of the overall COPD burden based on the 10 key metrics ranged from 1.5 for Puerto Rico and Utah to 4.6 for West Virginia. Conclusion: The level of COPD morbidity and mortality is severe throughout the United States. There is considerable variability in COPD metrics by state. These differences may be useful in identifying and addressing policy gaps in the public health approach to COPD and in implementing the COPD National Action Plan.
| S-EPMC6361472 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The extent to which trial-level factors differentially influence accrual to trials has not been comprehensively studied. Our objective was to evaluate the empirical relationship and predictive properties of putative risk factors for low accrual in the National Cancer Institute's (NCI's) Cooperative Group Program, now the National Clinical Trials Network (NCTN). Data from 787 phase II/III adult NCTN-sponsored trials launched between 2000 and 2011 were used to develop a logistic regression model to predict low accrual, defined as trials that closed with or were accruing at less than 50% of target; 46 trials opened between 2012 and 2013 were used for prospective validation. Candidate predictors were identified from a literature review and expert interviews; final predictors were selected using stepwise regression. Model performance was evaluated by calibration and discrimination via the area under the curve (AUC). All statistical tests were two-sided. Eighteen percent (n = 145) of NCTN-sponsored trials closed with low accrual or were accruing at less than 50% of target three years or more after initiation. A multivariable model of twelve trial-level risk factors had good calibration and discrimination for predicting trials with low accrual (AUC in trials launched 2000-2011 = 0.739, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.696 to 0.783]; 2012-2013: AUC = 0.732, 95% CI = 0.547 to 0.917). Results were robust to different definitions of low accrual and predictor selection strategies. We identified multiple characteristics of NCTN-sponsored trials associated with low accrual, several of which have not been previously empirically described, and developed a prediction model that can provide a useful estimate of accrual risk based on these factors. Future work should assess the role of such prediction tools in trial design and prioritization decisions.
| S-EPMC5964887 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PurposeTo increase access of underserved/health disparities communities to National Cancer Institute (NCI) clinical trials, the Radiation Research Program piloted a unique model - the Cancer Disparities Research Partnership (CDRP) program. CDRP targeted community hospitals with a limited past NCI funding history and provided funding to establish the infrastructure for their clinical research program.MethodsInitially, 5-year planning phase funding was awarded to six CDRP institutions through a cooperative agreement (U56). Five were subsequently eligible to compete for 5-year implementation phase (U54) funding and three received a second award. Additionally, the NCI Center to Reduce Cancer Health Disparities supported their U56 patient navigation programs.ResultsCommunity-based hospitals with little or no clinical trials experience required at least a year to develop the infrastructure and establish community outreach/education and patient navigation programs before accrual to clinical trials could begin. Once established, CDRP sites increased their yearly patient accrual mainly to NCI-sponsored cooperative group trials (~60%) and Principal Investigator/mentor-initiated trials (~30%). The total number of patients accrued on all types of trials was 2,371, while 5,147 patients received navigation services.ConclusionDespite a historical gap in participation in clinical cancer research, underserved communities are willing/eager to participate. Since a limited number of cooperative group trials address locally advanced diseases seen in health disparities populations; this shortcoming needs to be rectified. Sustainability for these programs remains a challenge. Addressing these gaps through research and public health mechanisms may have an important impact on their health, scientific progress, and efforts to increase diversity in NCI clinical trials.
| S-EPMC4217306 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivesThe purpose of this study is to evaluate and describe transitions in cigarette and smokeless tobacco (ST) use, including dual use, prospectively from adolescence into young adulthood.MethodsThe current study utilizes four waves of the National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health (Add Health) to examine patterns of cigarette and ST use (within 30 days of survey) over time among a cohort in the United States beginning in 7th-12th grade (1995) into young adulthood (2008-2009). Transition probabilities were estimated using Markov modeling.ResultsAmong the cohort (N=20,774), 48.7% reported using cigarettes, 12.8% reported using ST, and 7.2% reported dual use (cigarettes and ST in the same wave) in at least one wave. In general, the risk for transitioning between cigarettes and ST was higher for males and those who were older. Dual users exhibited a high probability (81%) of continuing dual use over time.ConclusionsFindings suggest that adolescents who use multiple tobacco products are likely to continue such use as they move into young adulthood. When addressing tobacco use among adolescents and young adults, multiple forms of tobacco use should be considered.
| S-EPMC4679648 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Study on cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk factors and their prevalence among the older people in Malaysia is limited. We aimed to determine the prevalence and factors associated with CVD risk factors using the non-laboratory Framingham Generalized 10-Year CVD risk score among older people in Malaysia. This was a population-based cross-sectional study using data of 3,375 participants aged ≥60 years from the National Health and Morbidity Survey 2015. Sociodemographic, health factors and clinical assessments (anthropometry and blood pressure) were included. Complex survey analysis was used to obtain prevalence with 95% confidence intervals (CI). We applied ordinal regression to determine the factors associated with CVD risk. The prevalence for the high 10-year CVD risk was 72.1%. Body mass index was higher among those aged 60-69 years in men (25.4kg/m2, 95%CI 25.1-25.8) and women (26.7kg/m2, 95%CI 26.3-27.1) than the other age groups. The factors associated with moderate and high 10-year CVD risk were Malay ethnicity (Odds Ratio(OR) 0.76, 95%CI 0.63-0.92, p = 0.004), unmarried status (OR 1.55, 95%CI 1.22-1.97, p<0.001) and physically inactive (OR 0.72, 95%CI 0.55-0.95, p = 0.020). There is a need for future study to evaluate preventive strategies to improve the health of older people in order to promote healthy ageing.
| S-EPMC7577487 | biostudies-literature
Project description:AimsThe US National Cancer Institute recently developed the PRO-CTCAE (Patient-Reported Outcomes version of the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events). PRO-CTCAE is a library of questions for clinical trial participants to self-report symptomatic adverse events (e.g. nausea). The objective of this study is to inform evidence-based selection of a recall period when PRO-CTCAE is included in a trial. We evaluated differences between 1-, 2-, 3-, and 4-week recall periods, using daily reporting as the reference.MethodsEnglish-speaking patients with cancer receiving chemotherapy and/or radiotherapy were enrolled at four US cancer centers and affiliated community clinics. Participants completed 27 PRO-CTCAE items electronically daily for 28 days, and then weekly over 4 weeks, using 1-, 2-, 3-, and 4-week recall periods. For each recall period, mean differences, effect sizes, and intraclass correlation coefficients were calculated to evaluate agreement between the maximum of daily ratings and the corresponding ratings obtained using longer recall periods (e.g. maximum of daily scores over 7 days vs 1-week recall). Analyses were repeated using the average of daily scores within each recall period rather than the maximum of daily scores.ResultsA total of 127 subjects completed questionnaires (57% male; median age: 57). The median of the 27 mean differences in scores on the PRO-CTCAE 5-point response scale comparing the maximum daily versus the longer recall period (and corresponding effect size) was -0.20 (-0.20) for 1-week recall, -0.36 (-0.31) for 2-week recall, -0.45 (-0.39) for 3-week recall, and -0.47 (-0.40) for 4-week recall. The median intraclass correlation across 27 items between the maximum of daily ratings and the corresponding longer recall ratings for 1-week recall was 0.70 (range: 0.54-0.82), for 2-week recall was 0.74 (range: 0.58-0.83), for 3-week recall was 0.72 (range: 0.61-0.84), and for 4-week recall was 0.72 (range: 0.64-0.86). Similar results were observed for all analyses using the average of daily scores rather than the maximum of daily scores.ConclusionA 1-week recall corresponds best to daily reporting. Although intraclass correlations remain stable over time, there are small but progressively larger differences between daily and longer recall periods at 2, 3, and 4 weeks, respectively. The preferred recall period for the PRO-CTCAE is the past 7 days, although investigators may opt for recall periods of 2, 3, or 4 weeks with an understanding that there may be some information loss.
| S-EPMC5448293 | biostudies-literature
Project description:While radiosensitizing chemotherapy has improved survival for several types of cancer, current chemoradiation regimens remain ineffective for many patients and have substantial toxicities. Given the strong need for the development of novel radiosensitizers to further improve patient outcomes, the Radiation Research Program (RRP) and the Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) in the National Cancer Institute (NCI) issued a Request for Proposals (RFP) through the NCI SBIR Development Center's contracts pathway. We sought to determine the research outcomes for the NCI SBIR Development Center's funded proposals for the development of radiosensitizers. We identified SBIR-funded contracts and grants for the development of radiosensitizers from 2009 to 2018 using the National Institutes of Health (NIH) Reporter database. Research outcomes of the NCI SBIR Development Center-funded proposals were determined using a comprehensive internet search. We searched PubMed, clinicaltrials.gov, company websites and google.com for research articles, abstracts and posters, clinical trials, press releases and other news, related to progress in the development of funded radiosensitizers. To protect the intellectual property of the investigators and small businesses, all information obtained and reported is publicly available. The SBIR Program has funded four contracts and 11 grants for the development of novel radiosensitizers. Two companies have received phase IIb bridge awards. Overall, 50% of companies (6/12) have successfully advanced their investigational drugs into prospective clinical trials in cancer patients, and all but one company are investigating their drug in combination with radiation therapy as described in the NCI SBIR Development Center proposal. To date, only one company has initiated a randomized trial of standard of care with or without their radiosensitizer. In conclusion, the NCI SBIR Development Center has funded the development of novel radiosensitizers leading to clinical trials of novel drugs in combination with radiation therapy. Continued follow-up is needed to determine if any of these novel radiosensitizers produce improved tumor control and/or overall survival.
| S-EPMC7266046 | biostudies-literature
Project description:There is no validated, discriminating, and easy-to-apply tool for estimating risk of colorectal neoplasia. We studied whether the National Cancer Institute's (NCI's) Colorectal Cancer (CRC) Risk Assessment Tool, which estimates future CRC risk, could estimate current risk for advanced colorectal neoplasia among average-risk persons. This cross-sectional study involved individuals age 50 to 80 years undergoing first-time screening colonoscopy. We measured medical and family history, lifestyle information, and physical measures and calculated each person's future CRC risk using the NCI tool's logistic regression equation. We related quintiles of future CRC risk to the current risk of advanced neoplasia (sessile serrated polyp or tubular adenoma ≥ 1 cm, a polyp with villous histology or high-grade dysplasia, or CRC). All statistical tests were two-sided. For 4457 (98.5%) with complete data (mean age = 57.2 years, SD = 6.6 years, 51.7% women), advanced neoplasia prevalence was 8.26%. Based on quintiles of five-year estimated absolute CRC risk, current risks of advanced neoplasia were 2.1% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.3% to 3.3%), 4.8% (95% CI = 3.5% to 6.4%), 6.4% (95% CI = 4.9% to 8.2%), 10.0% (95% CI = 8.1% to 12.1%), and 17.6% (95% CI = 15.5% to 20.6%; P < .001). For quintiles of estimated 10-year CRC risk, corresponding current risks for advanced neoplasia were 2.2% (95% CI = 1.4% to 3.5%), 4.8% (95% CI = 3.5% to 6.4%), 6.5% (95% CI = 5.0% to 8.3%), 9.3% (95% CI = 7.5% to 11.4%), and 18.4% (95% CI = 15.9% to 21.1%; P < .001). Among persons with an estimated five-year CRC risk above the median, current risk for advanced neoplasia was 12.8%, compared with 3.7% among those below the median (relative risk = 3.4, 95 CI = 2.7 to 4.4). The NCI's Risk Assessment Tool, which estimates future CRC risk, may be used to estimate current risk for advanced neoplasia, making it potentially useful for tailoring and improving CRC screening efficiency among average-risk persons.
| S-EPMC6915828 | biostudies-literature