Research suggest that Hispanics in the U.S. are disproportionately affected by the consequences of intimate partner violence. Nevertheless, few intimate partner violence prevention interventions have been developed to address the unique needs and preferences of this population. The Partnership for Domestic Violence Prevention is a community-based participatory research project that assessed the needs and preferences for prevention programs for Hispanics in Miami-Dade County. Nine focus groups with domestic violence service providers, victims and general community members were conducted (N= 76). Four major themes emerged from the focus groups. These included immigrants and teens as the highest priority groups to target in prevention efforts, culture as a double-edged sword, the system that helps and hurts the victim, and the need for wide-scale prevention programs that would reach Hispanics systematically. The results from this study have important implications for the development of intimate violence prevention interventions targeting Hispanics in the U.S.

(1) Background: Pathologic necrosis of soft tissue sarcomas (STS) has been used to determine treatment response, but its relationship to neoadjuvant treatments remains indeterminate. In this retrospective, single institution study, we hypothesized that neoadjuvant chemoradiation (NA-CRT) yields higher rates of pathologic complete response (pCR) than neoadjuvant radiation (NA-XRT) or chemotherapy (NA-CT) alone. (2) Methods: Patients with extremity STS between 2011–2020 who received neoadjuvant treatment were included. pCR was defined as percent necrosis of the surgical specimen greater than or equal to 90%. (3) Results: 79 patients were analyzed. 51.9% of the population were male with a mean age of 58.4 years. 49.4% identified as Non-Hispanic White. Twenty-six (32.9%) patients achieved pCR while 53 (67.1%) did not. NA-CT (OR 15.82, 95% CI = 2.58–96.9, p = 0.003 in univariate (UVA) and OR 24.7, 95% CI = 2.88–211.2, p = 0.003 in multivariate (MVA), respectively) and NA-XRT (OR 5.73, 95% CI = 1.51–21.8, p = 0.010 in UVA and OR 7.95, 95% CI = 1.87–33.7, p = 0.005 in MVA, respectively) was significantly associated with non- pCR when compared to NA-CRT. The analysis also demonstrated that grade 3 tumors, when using grade 2 as reference, also had significantly higher odds of achieving pCR (OR 0.23, 95% CI = 0.06–0.80, p = 0.022 in UVA and OR 0.16, 95% CI = 0.04–0.70, p = 0.015 in MVA, respectively). (4) Conclusion: NA-CRT yields superior pCR compared to other neoadjuvant regimens. This extends to higher grade tumors.

IMPORTANCE A large proportion of extremity soft-tissue sarcomas (ESS) occur among young adults, yet this group is underrepresented in clinical trials, resulting in limited data on this population. Younger patients present many complex challenges that affect clinical management. OBJECTIVE To investigate variations in treatment management in young adults vs older adults with ESS. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS This multicenter retrospective cohort study used the National Cancer Data Base (NCDB) to identify patients 18 years and older with ESS who received definitive treatment (ie, limb-sparing surgery [LSS] or amputation) between 2004 and 2014. Data analysis was conducted in November 2019. EXPOSURES Treatment regimen received among young adults (aged 18-39 years) and older adults (Ն40 years) after diagnosis with ESS. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES To detect unique factors associated with treatment decisions in young adults with ESS, multivariable analyses used logistic regressions for patterns of treatment and their association with demographic factors and tumor characteristics. RESULTSOverall, 8953 patients were identified, and among these, 1280 (14.3%) were young adults.From the full cohort, 4796 patients (53.6%) identified as male and 6615 (73.9%) identified as non-Hispanic White. More young adults than older adults underwent amputation (age 18-39 years, 104 of 1280 [8.1%]; age 40-64 years, 217 of 3937 [5.5%]; aged Ն65 years, 199 of 3736 [5.3%]), but the association was not statistically significant (age Ն65 years, odds ratio [OR], 1.49; 95% CI, 1.00-2.23; P = .05). Young adults were more likely to receive chemotherapy than older patients (age 40-65 years, OR, 0.52; 95% CI, 0.45-0.60; P = .001; Ն65 years, OR, 0.16; 95% CI, 0.12-0.20; P = .001). Conversely, young adults were less likely to receive radiation therapy compared with older