The contribution of the Greenland ice sheet to sea-level rise has accelerated in recent decades. Subglacial lake drainage events can induce an ice sheet dynamic response--a process that has been observed in Antarctica, but not yet in Greenland, where the presence of subglacial lakes has only recently been discovered. Here we investigate the water flow paths from a subglacial lake, which drained beneath the Greenland ice sheet in 2011. Our observations suggest that the lake was fed by surface meltwater flowing down a nearby moulin, and that the draining water reached the ice margin via a subglacial tunnel. Interferometric synthetic aperture radar-derived measurements of ice surface motion acquired in 1995 suggest that a similar event may have occurred 16 years earlier, and we propose that, as the climate warms, increasing volumes of surface meltwater routed to the bed will cause such events to become more common in the future.

Purpose

Young adult (YA) cancer survivors have high rates of adverse health and psychosocial outcomes. This risk-stratified, multicenter, randomized controlled trial (RCT) compared a self-management survivorship intervention to usual care in YA survivors with symptoms of cancer-related distress, insomnia, fatigue, pain, and/or depression.

Methods

Eligibility included age 18-39 at diagnosis with an invasive malignancy in the previous 1-5 years. Baseline assessment determined "high need" participants, with 2-5 elevated targeted symptoms. We randomized high need participants to intervention or usual care and offered intervention participants a survivorship clinic visit, which included mutually decided action plans for symptoms. Follow-up calls at 1 and 3 months after the clinic visit reviewed action plan progress. Outcomes compared rates of improved symptoms for intervention vs usual care at 6 months and 12 months.

Results

N = 344 completed baseline assessment, with n = 147 (43%) categorized as high need and randomized. Of n = 73 randomized to the intervention, n = 42 (58%) did not attend their survivorship clinic visit. In intent-to-treat analyses, aggregate symptom scores did not differ between arms, though distress improved for 46% in the intervention arm at 6 months compared to 18% in usual care (p = 0.03) among those with elevated distress at baseline.

Conclusions

Distress improved for YAs who received self-management survivorship care. However, the study demonstrates a need for alternative strategies for providing YA survivorship care.

Trial registration

NCT02192333 IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS: While YA survivors demonstrate some improved distress when provided survivorship care, to make care accessible and effective, they require options such as remote delivery of care.

Purpose

Survivorship care plans (SCPs) have been suggested to reduce fragmentation of care experienced by cancer survivors. Acceptance of SCPs is high, but trials in the United States are few. This pilot study used a quasiexperimental design to examine the outcomes achieved by breast cancer survivors receiving a standardized SCP visit at one of seven comprehensive cancer centers.

Materials and methods

Outcomes were assessed before and again 3 months after delivery of an SCP and included survivors' use of and satisfaction with SCPs, perceived knowledge about survivorship, and assessment of the quality and coordination of survivorship care.

Results

One hundred thirty-nine survivors of breast cancer completed baseline and follow-up measures and received a standardized SCP visit. Participants most commonly used SCP materials to make decisions about exercise (64%), which tests to receive and when (62%), and dietary changes (62%). Only 21% shared the SCP with their primary care provider during that time. Satisfaction with the SCP was high, with 90% of participants reporting being at least satisfied with the SCP. Perceived knowledge about survivorship improved after SCP delivery, as did perceived care coordination and the provider's knowledge of the effects of cancer on survivors (all P < .001). Individuals closer to the time of diagnosis reported greater satisfaction with and use of SCPs.

Conclusion

This study demonstrates improvements in perceived knowledge and quality of survivorship care after receipt of a comprehensive SCP. Survivors were satisfied with their SCP, and those closer to diagnosis reported greater satisfaction with and use of the materials.

BACKGROUND:The impact of cancer and its treatment on employment and financial burden in adolescents/young adults (AYAs) is not fully known. METHODS:Eligibility for this cross-sectional study of AYA cancer survivors included the diagnosis of a malignancy between ages 18 and 39 years and survey completion within 1 to 5 years from diagnosis and ≥1 year after therapy completion. Participants were selected randomly from the tumor registries of 7 participating sites and completed an online patient-reported outcomes survey to assess employment and financial concerns. Treatment data were abstracted from medical records. Data were analyzed across diagnoses and by tumor site using logistic regression and Wald-based 95% confidence intervals adjusting for age (categorized), sex, insurance status, education (categorized), and treatment exposures. RESULTS:Participants included 872 survivors (breast cancer, n = 241; thyroid cancer, n = 126; leukemia/lymphoma, n = 163; other malignancies, n = 342). Exposure to chemotherapy in breast cancer survivors was associated with an increase in self-reported mental impairment in work tasks (odds ratio [OR], 2.66) and taking unpaid time off (OR, 2.62); survivors of "other" malignancies reported an increase in mental impairment of work tasks (OR, 3.67) and borrowing >$10,000 (OR, 3.43). Radiation exposure was associated with an increase of mental impairment in work tasks (OR, 2.05) in breast cancer survivors, taking extended paid time off work in thyroid cancer survivors (OR, 5.05), and physical impairment in work tasks in survivors of "other" malignancies (OR, 3.11). Finally, in survivors of "other" malignancies, having undergone surgery was associated with an increase in physical (OR, 3.11) and mental impairment (OR, 2.31) of work tasks. CONCLUSIONS:Cancer treatment has a significant impact on AYA survivors' physical and mental work capacity and time off from work.

Background

While vaccines have established utility against COVID-19, phase 3 efficacy studies have generally not comprehensively evaluated protection provided by previous infection or hybrid immunity (previous infection plus vaccination). Individual patient data from US government-supported harmonized vaccine trials provide an unprecedented sample population to address this issue. We characterized the protective efficacy of previous SARS-CoV-2 infection and hybrid immunity against COVID-19 early in the pandemic over three-to six-month follow-up and compared with vaccine-associated protection.

Methods

In this post-hoc cross-protocol analysis of the Moderna, AstraZeneca, Janssen, and Novavax COVID-19 vaccine clinical trials, we allocated participants into four groups based on previous-infection status at enrolment and treatment: no previous infection/placebo; previous infection/placebo; no previous infection/vaccine; and previous infection/vaccine. The main outcome was RT-PCR-confirmed COVID-19 >7-15 days (per original protocols) after final study injection. We calculated crude and adjusted efficacy measures.

Findings

Previous infection/placebo participants had a 92% decreased risk of future COVID-19 compared to no previous infection/placebo participants (overall hazard ratio [HR] ratio: 0.08; 95% CI: 0.05-0.13). Among single-dose Janssen participants, hybrid immunity conferred greater protection than vaccine alone (HR: 0.03; 95% CI: 0.01-0.10). Too few infections were observed to draw statistical inferences comparing hybrid immunity to vaccine alone for other trials. Vaccination, previous infection, and hybrid immunity all provided near-complete protection against severe disease.

Interpretation

Previous infection, any hybrid immunity, and two-dose vaccination all provided substantial protection against symptomatic and severe COVID-19 through the early Delta period. Thus, as a surrogate for natural infection, vaccination remains the safest approach to protection.

Funding

National Institutes of Health.