Abstract B099: Addressing cancer disparities in the United States-Affiliated Pacific Island jurisdictions: Insights from the Scaling What Works program

Le résumé fourni par la source

Abstract Purpose The Scaling What Works (SWW) program aimed to build the capacity of National Comprehensive Cancer Control Program (NCCCP) recipients to scale three CDC-identified cancer control projects through training, mentorship, and technical assistance (TA). The SWW program held a Symposium to provide in-person training on adapting, implementing, evaluating, sustaining, and scaling the three projects. We recruited 100% of US-Affiliated Pacific Island (USAPI) NCCCP programs (n=6), who made up approximately 26% of all programs that attended the Symposium (n=23). The USAPI jurisdictions face high cancer burden due, in part, to the United States nuclear legacy, the effects of climate change, limited medical infrastructure, and lack of culturally competent, centralized care across the almost 4,000 miles that the USAPI spans. Through the SWW program, USAPI recipients are supported in their ongoing efforts to mitigate cancer disparities affecting their communities. MethodsWe applied community-based participatory research methods and health equity principles to ensure the SWW program was relevant and responsive to the USAPI recipients’ contexts and needs. We created a SWW subcommittee to learn about and advocate for the specific needs of the USAPI. The committee spoke with ten clinicians and researchers with experience working in the USAPI, across four informal meetings, to understand the unique cancer prevention and control context of each USAPI jurisdiction. The committee reviewed USAPI cancer plans and extracted data related to SWW activities, including cancer prevention priorities, community partners, demographic characteristics, and healthcare infrastructure. Data were added to a matrix, coded, and summarized by subcommittee team members to develop a USAPI fact sheet. We shared the fact sheet with SWW Symposium facilitators and mentors to provide them with the necessary information to support the USAPI programs. Findings We identified components critical to providing effective training and TA that will support USAPI-led work to address disparities in cancer prevention and control. These components include 1) acknowledging the current and historical power dynamics that establish the USAPI cancer prevention and control program space, 2) adjusting generalized training content to each jurisdiction’s unique context and cancer prevention goals, 3) adapting communication strategies to USAPI programs’ preferences and time zones, 4) facilitating networking opportunities both between NCCCP USAPI jurisdictions and across all NCCCP recipients to build a SWW community of practice, and 5) establishing a sustained, bidirectional partnership between USAPI program leaders and the SWW team to collaborate on future cancer prevention and control projects and to provide training and TA, as needed. ConclusionsThe lessons learned from SWW regarding health equity and capacity-building can inform the efforts of researchers, evaluators, and training and TA providers working with USAPI jurisdictions, states, and territories engaged in cancer prevention and control work. Citation Format: Amy L. Tran, Mary Wangen, Renée M. Ferrari, Jingle Xu, Alison T. Brenner, Stephanie B. Wheeler, Rebecca J. Lee, Elizabeth A. Rohan, Angela R. Moore, Shixiu Wang, Alyssa LaMonica, Mary Puckett, Amy L. Thompson, CK Smith, Katie Jones, Malesa Pereira, Rogelio Robles-Morales, Lori A. Crane, Courtney N. Petagna, Thuy T. Vu, Betsy C Risendal, Rachel Hirschey. Addressing cancer disparities in the United States-Affiliated Pacific Island jurisdictions: Insights from the Scaling What Works program [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 17th AACR Conference on the Science of Cancer Health Disparities in Racial/Ethnic Minorities and the Medically Underserved; 2024 Sep 21-24; Los Angeles, CA. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2024;33(9 Suppl):Abstract nr B099.

Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.