ACORI RESEARCH REVIEW: OCTOBER 2020

Closing the Access Gap: A Message from the President's Task Force

By Jennie R. Crews, MD, MMM, FACP

As we look at how community oncology can close the gap in cancer research, a critical piece of the puzzle is improving access to trials for those living in rural areas. This issue of the Research Review features interviews with oncology providers who are succeeding in making clinical trials an option for patients in rural communities. The challenges are many: geography, health and economic disparities, a lean (or lack of) oncology workforce in many regions, trial eligibility criteria, costs, and provider bandwidth, among others.


Improving Access to Clinical Trials in Rural Areas

Over the course of his career in medicine, oncologist Jack Hensold, MD, has filled many roles. Before joining Case Western Reserve University in Cleveland, he was an instructor of medicine at Harvard Medical School and a visiting scientist at Massachusetts Institute of Technology. At Case Western, he served as an associate professor of medicine and ran a research lab funded by grants from the National Institutes of Health, the American Cancer Society, and the Veterans Administration. During his years at Case Western, he became director of the hematology and medical oncology fellowship program and chaired the Scientific Review Board for the American Cancer Society in Ohio. Having studied, lived, and worked in large urban academic medical centers in Chicago; Madison, Wisconsin; Boston; and Cleveland, in 2004, he decided to make a lifestyle change and relocated to southwest Montana. Since that time, Dr. Hensold has been caring for patients at the Bozeman Health Cancer Center in Bozeman, Montana.


A Focus on Targeting KRAS G12C in NSCLC

A member of the RAS gene family, KRAS G12C is a mutation that occurs in multiple solid tumor types. Of patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) in the U.S., about 13% have the KRAS G12C mutation. This cancer-driver is also found in 3-5% of individuals with colorectal cancer and in about 1-2% of other solid tumors.


What Works Best in the Real World?

Research studies on cancer prevention and screening provide evidence on efficacy of interventions. Clinical guidelines, USPSTF recommendations, and guidance from professional societies establish criteria for whom to screen and when. Implementation science research assesses how best to integrate these interventions into healthcare practice.


Related Resources


Joining All of Us

The National Institutes of Health (NIH) ambitious All of Us study launched in May 2018. The study framework grew from the final report of the Precision Medicine Initiative Working Group. The mission: to accelerate health research and medical breakthroughs and further enable individualized prevention, treatment, and care across all of the U.S. population. The aim: to enroll 1 million participants in the U.S. Read the study protocol.


Reducing Disparities in the Oncology Workforce

When it comes to cancer research, equitable access and representation are not just issues for patients. Only one-third of oncologists are women,1 and racial and ethnic minorities and women continue to be underrepresented in leadership and medical school faculty positions.2