BackgroundCommunicating results to participants is a fundamental component of community-based participatory research (CBPR). However, in environmental exposure studies this is not always practiced, partly due to ethical concerns of communicating results that have unknown clinical significance.MethodsGrowing Up Healthy was a community-based participatory research study that sought to understand the relationship between environmental exposures to phthalates and early puberty in young girls. After in-depth consultation with a Community Advisory Board, study investigators provided group summary results of phthalate exposures and related health information to the parents of study participants. Parents’ comprehension and knowledge of the health information provided was then assessed through questionnaires.ResultsAfter receiving the information from the research team, responders were able to correctly answer comprehension questions about phthalate exposures in their community, were able to identify ways to reduce exposure to phthalates, and indicated plans to do so. Questionnaires revealed that parents wanted more information on phthalates, and that children’s environmental health was an important concern.ConclusionsWe conclude that effective communication of exposure results of unknown clinical significance to participants in environmental health studies can be achieved by providing group summary results and actionable health information. Results suggest that there was an improvement in knowledge of environmental health and in risk reduction behaviors in our study population.

Background Patient reported outcomes (PROs) have been associated with improved symptom management and quality of life in patients with cancer. However, the implementation of PROs in an academic clinical practice has not been thoroughly described. Here we report on the execution, feasibility and healthcare utilization outcomes of an electronic PRO (ePRO) application for cancer patients at an academic medical center. Methods We conducted a randomized trial comparing an experimental ePRO arm to standard of care in patients with advanced cancer in the thoracic, gastrointestinal, and genitourinary oncology groups at Stanford Cancer Center from March 2018 to November 2019. We describe the pre-implementation, implementation, and post-implementation phases of the ePRO arm, technological barriers, electronic health record (EHR) integration, clinician burden, and patient data privacy and security. Feasibility was pre-specified to be at least 70% completion of all questionnaires. Acceptability was based on patient and clinician feedback. Ambulatory healthcare utilization was assessed by reviewing numbers of phone messages, electronic portal messages, and referrals for supportive care. Results Of 617 ePRO questionnaires sent to 72 patients, 445 (72%) were completed. Most clinicians (87.5%) and patients (93%) felt neutral or positive about the ePRO tool’s ease of use. Exposure to ePRO did not cause a measurable change in ambulatory healthcare utilization, with a median of less than two phone messages and supportive care referrals, and 5–6 portal messages. Conclusions Web-based ePRO tools for patients with advanced cancer are feasible and acceptable without increasing clinical burden. Key lessons include the importance of pilot testing, engagement of stakeholders at all levels, and the need for customization by disease group. Future directions for this work include completion of EHR integration, expansion to other centers, and development of integrated workflows for routine clinical practice.

Calcitriol (1,25(OH)2D3) is cytostatic for prostate cancer (CaP), but had limited therapeutic utility due to hypercalcemia-related toxicities, leading to the development of low-calcemic calcitriol analogs. We show that one analog, 1-α-Hydroxyvitamin-D5 (1α(OH)D5), induced apoptosis in castration-sensitive LNCaP prostate cancer cells, but unlike calcitriol, did not increase androgen receptor (AR) transcriptional activity. LNCaP-AI, a castrate-resistant (CRCaP) LNCaP subline, was resistant to 1α(OH)D5 in the presence of androgens; however, androgen withdrawal (AWD), although ineffective by itself, sensitized LNCaP-AI cells to 1α(OH)D5. Investigation of the mechanism revealed that the vitamin D receptor (VDR), which mediates the effects of 1α(OH)D5, is downregulated in LNCaP-AI cells compared to LNCaP in the presence of androgens, whereas AWD restored VDR expression. Since LNCaP-AI cells expressed higher AR compared to LNCaP and AWD decreased AR, this indicated an inverse relationship between VDR and AR. Further, AR stimulation (by increased androgen) suppressed VDR, while AR downregulation (by ARsiRNA) stimulated VDR levels and sensitized LNCaP-AI cells to 1α(OH)D5 similar to AWD. Another cell line, pRNS-1-1, although isolated from a normal prostate, had lost AR expression in culture and adapted to androgen-independent growth. These cells expressed the VDR and were sensitive to 1α(OH)D5, but restoration of AR expression suppressed VDR levels and induced resistance to 1α(OH)D5 treatment. Taken together, these results demonstrate negative regulation of VDR by AR in CRCaP cells. This effect is likely mediated by prohibitin (PHB), which was inhibited by AR transcriptional activity and stimulated VDR in CRCaP, but not castrate-sensitive cells. Therefore, in castration sensitive cells, although the AR negatively regulates PHB, this does not affect VDR expression, whereas in CRCaP cells, negative regulation of PHB by the AR results in concomitant negative regulation of the VDR by the AR. These data demonstrate a novel mechanism by which 1α(OH)D5 prolong the effectiveness of AWD in CaP cells.