OBJECTIVES: The American Academy of Pediatrics National Registry for the Surveillance and Epidemiology of Perinatal coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) (NPC-19) was developed to provide information on the effects of perinatal severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection. METHODS: National Registry for the Surveillance and Epidemiology of Perinatal COVID-19 participating centers entered maternal and newborn data for pregnant persons who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 infection between 14 days before and 10 days after delivery. Incidence of and morbidities associated with maternal and newborn SARS-CoV-2 infection were assessed. RESULTS: From April 6, 2020 to March 19, 2021, 242 centers in the United States centers reported data for 7524 pregnant persons; at the time of delivery, 78.1% of these persons were asymptomatic, 18.2% were symptomatic but not hospitalized specifically for COVID-19, 3.4% were hospitalized for COVID-19 treatment, and 18 (0.2%) died in the hospital of COVID-related complications. Among 7648 newborns, 6486 (84.8%) were tested for SARS-CoV-2, and 144 (2.2%) were positive; the highest rate of newborn infection was observed when mothers first tested positive in the immediate postpartum period (17 of 125, 13.6%). No newborn deaths were attributable to SARS-CoV-2 infection. Overall, 15.6% of newborns were preterm: among tested newborns, 30.1% of polymerase chain reaction-positive and 16.2% of polymerase chain reaction-negative were born preterm (P < .001). Need for mechanical ventilation did not differ by newborn SARS-CoV-2 test result, but those with positive tests were more likely to be admitted to a NICU. CONCLUSIONS: Early in the pandemic, SARS-CoV-2 infection was acquired by newborns at variable rates and without apparent short-term effects. During a period that preceded widespread availability of vaccines, we observed higher than expected numbers of preterm births and maternal in-hospital deaths.

No abstract

e18527 Background: The underrepresentation of minority populations in research violates principles of distributive justice, slows scientific progress, and exacerbates health disparities. Henry Ford Cancer Institute (HFCI) is one of 20 sites offering clinical trials in Michigan and currently participates in 1300 trials. The rate of cancer cases at HFCI is 78% in whites and 21.9% in Blacks/African Americans (B/AA). However, analysis of cancer clinical trials conducted at HFCI showed participation rates to be 2.66% in B/AA and 90.28% in whites. Diverse attempts by HFCI to improve participation of B/AA in clinical trials have yielded limited success. The Participatory Action for Access to Clinical Trials (PAACT) project is using a community-based participatory research (CBPR) approach to design/adapt, pilot, and evaluate interventions which address cancer clinical trial participation barriers among B/AA. Methods: PAACT uses a 5-step approach: 1. Establish a steering committee (SC) in partnership with the Detroit Urban Research Center, which has a strong history of implementing CBPR programs in Detroit. 2. Conduct a scoping review to evaluate evidence-based strategies and interventions used to engage B/AA communities in clinical trials. 3. Conduct qualitative and quantitative research with members of B/AA community, cancer survivors/patients, and HFCI providers. 4. Engage stakeholders in the interpretation and translation of data to inform intervention strategies. 5. Pilot the intervention(s) to assess B/AA individuals’ behavioral intentions to enroll and participate in cancer clinical trials, and health care providers’ intentions to engage in change processes. Results: We have conducted 13 SC meetings, co-facilitated by a community, academic and health system partner. The SC has been actively engaged in all aspects of the project. Through the scoping review, we identified five categories of recruitment and retention strategies. We have conducted 13 focus groups with 100 participants, 7 provider interviews, and administered 1 survey to HFCI staff. Data from the focus groups has provided information on respondents’ clinical trial knowledge and systemic, socio-cultural, and economic barriers to trial participation. Data from the provider interviews has provided information on experience with clinical trial recruitment and recommendations for improving participation among B/AA community members. Conclusions: Through CBPR, PAACT actively engages B/AA community members, survivors/patients, healthcare providers, and researchers in the process to develop/adapt, implement, and evaluate strategies to better inform communities and patients about cancer clinical trials. The long-term goal of this project is to implement changes in both the community and the health care system thereby increase levels of participation in clinical trials among B/AA.

Introduction One major limitation to cancer prevention and control in Africa has been lack of accurate and reliable epidemiological data. To date, there is no publicly available systematic review and meta-analysis on the prevalence of breast cancer in Africa. This data is important to understand the burden of the disease in Africa and identify areas lacking reliable studies. Objective The objective of this review was to examine the prevalence of breast cancer in Africa based on region, subtype, and screening. Methods A systematic search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, PUBMED, ISI Web of Science, BIOSIS, African Journal Online, and Global Health was conducted. We included population-based or hospital-based cancer registry studies on breast cancer conducted on African populations and providing estimates of breast cancer cases or prevalence over a period. A random effect meta-analysis was done to determine the pooled prevalence of breast cancer in Africa based on region, subtype and screening, using Stata Statistical Software: Release 16. College Station, TX: StataCorp LLC. Results Our search of databases yielded 2030 references that were imported into Covidence. A total of 44 studies were included in the review. The overall pooled prevalence of breast cancer in Africa was 0.48% (95% CI: 0.05-0.92). With regards to regional prevalence, the estimated prevalence of breast cancer among women in Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA), 0.68% (-0.03 - 0.1.39) was remarkably higher than that of women in North Africa (NA) 0.16% (95% CI: -0.11-0.42). Also, the overall prevalence of triple negative breast cancer (TNBC) among female breast cancer patients was 29.51% (CI: 23.94-35.08). A sub-group analysis revealed, TNBC was more prevalent in women from SSA 29.51 (CI: 23.94- 35.08, 18 studies) than women from NA 20.17(14.63-25.71, 8 studies). Meta-analysis of African women participation in Breast Self-Examination (BSE) produced a prevalence of 29.57 (CI: 7.90-51.25). This was higher than the prevalence of African women participation in Clinical Breast Examination and mammography, 12.22 (7.58-16.86). Conclusions Though the incidence of breast cancer in Africa is relatively low, the same cannot be said of its prevalence. Also, within Africa, there are clear regional and sub-regional differences in both breast cancer prevalence and the prevalence of TNBC among breast cancer patients. This may be attributed to limited infrastructure needed for breast cancer control and prevention especially within SSA regions. Establishment of robust hospital-based cancer registries in Africa will boost the collection of accurate and complete cancer data that can be used in epidemiological research, patient care improvement, and cancer control which will ultimately lead to the reduction of breast cancer burden in Africa. Citation Format: Livingstone Aduse-Poku, Kurt Fernando, Sabrina I. Fossi, Sylvester Antwi, Haythem Ali, Eleanor Walker, Evelyn M. Jiagge. A systematic review and meta-analysis of the prevalence of breast cancer in Africa: Identifying unanswered questions [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the AACR Virtual Conference: Thirteenth AACR Conference on the Science of Cancer Health Disparities in Racial/Ethnic Minorities and the Medically Underserved; 2020 Oct 2-4. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2020;29(12 Suppl):Abstract nr PO-152.