Elizabeth J. Cathcart-Rake

Dr. Elizabeth J. Cathcart-Rake

orcid

Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

13Years (2014-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
1 June 2021 in JCO Oncology Practice
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
ECElizabeth J. Cathcart-Rake
Elizabeth J. Cathcart-Rake
KRKathryn J. Ruddy
Kathryn J. Ruddy
ABArchie Bleyer
Archie Bleyer
RJRebecca H. Johnson
Rebecca H. Johnson
In the United States, one in 196 women is diagnosed with breast cancer under the age of 40 years. Adolescents and young adults (AYAs), of age 15-39 years at diagnosis, experience a number of unique challenges when confronting breast cancer. The incidence of invasive breast cancer has increased among AYA women in the United States since 2004, and most of this change is due to an increase in young women diagnosed with distant disease. AYAs are more likely than older women to present with aggressive subtypes and advanced disease, and they often require systemic staging at diagnosis. Clinical trials should be considered whenever possible, particularly in AYAs with locally advanced or metastatic disease at diagnosis and those with disease progression or recurrence. A significant proportion of AYAs carry germline cancer predisposition mutations, which necessitates prompt genetic testing for all AYAs at diagnosis and may influence choice of local therapy. Suppression of ovarian function, as an adjunct to chemotherapy, may improve breast cancer survival in AYAs. To provide optimal care for AYAs with breast cancer, clinicians should engage multidisciplinary teams that offer fertility preservation, genetic counseling, physical and occupational therapy, nutrition, and psychosocial support, along with medical expertise in tailoring cancer-directed therapy and symptom management toward young women.

13 September 2018 in Current Oncology Reports
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
ECElizabeth J. Cathcart-Rake
Elizabeth J. Cathcart-Rake

18 December 2018 in Cancer
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
ECElizabeth J. Cathcart-Rake
Elizabeth J. Cathcart-Rake
TZTyler Zemla
Tyler Zemla
AJAminah Jatoi
Aminah Jatoi
KWKathryn E. Weaver
Kathryn E. Weaver
HNHeather Neuman
Heather Neuman
CKCharles Kamen
Charles Kamen

1 September 2024 in JCO Oncology Practice
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
ECElizabeth J. Cathcart-Rake
Elizabeth J. Cathcart-Rake
AJAminah Jatoi
Aminah Jatoi
EDEmily V. Dressler
Emily V. Dressler
CKCarol Kittel
Carol Kittel
KWKathryn E. Weaver
Kathryn E. Weaver
EWEden G. Wood
Eden G. Wood
PURPOSE: Routine collection of sexual orientation (SO) and gender identity (GI; collectively SOGI) in cancer clinics advances cancer care equity. METHODS: In 2022, NCI Community Oncology Research Program (NCORP) practice groups were asked about routine collection of SOGI data in the electronic health record. The proportions of practice groups reporting collection of SO and/or GI data were calculated, and practice group characteristics were assessed for associations. RESULTS: Of 271 practice groups nationwide, 42% (n = 112) collect SO data, 58% (n = 157) collect GI data, and 35% (n = 96) collect both. In multivariate analyses, SO data collection was associated with practice groups having minority outreach staff (odds ratio [OR], 2.07 [95% CI, 1.12 to 3.81]; P = .02); GI data collection was associated with practice groups located in the Northeastern United States (OR, 2.08 [95% CI, 0.73 to 5.91]; P = .045), and those with a higher proportion of new patients who were White (OR, 1.02 [95% CI, 1.01 to 1.04]; P < .001). Practice groups in the South were least likely to collect SOGI data (OR, 0.49 [95% CI, 0.26 to 0.94]; P = .004). There were no statistically significant differences in SO and/or GI collection on the basis of the practice group's proportion of Medicaid/Medicare patients, number of new patients with cancer per year, or practice ownership. CONCLUSION: Slightly over one third of NCORP practice groups report routinely collecting SOGI data. There are regional differences in data collection, underscoring the need to craft targeted, region-specific interventions focused on boosting the capture and recording of SOGI data in an affirming manner.

9 December 2024 in CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
ECElizabeth J. Cathcart-Rake
Elizabeth J. Cathcart-Rake
ACAlexandre Chan
Alexandre Chan
AMAlvaro Menendez
Alvaro Menendez
DMDenise Markstrom
Denise Markstrom
CSCarla Schnitzlein
Carla Schnitzlein
DDDon S. Dizon
Don S. Dizon
In the United States, over 2 million individuals openly identify with a gender that differs from their sex assigned at birth. A cancer diagnosis is physically and psychologically taxing—and, in some, traumatic. However, for transgender and gender‐diverse (TGD) people, many of whom have experienced discrimination in myriad health care settings, the challenges may be even greater. These recommendations focus on how best to deliver quality cancer care to transgender men (individuals who identify as men but were assigned female sex at birth), transgender women (individuals who identify as women but were assigned male sex at birth), and people who identify somewhere beyond this gender spectrum as nonbinary or using other terms, based on the available, albeit sparse, literature. This review broaches: (1) the epidemiology of cancer in TGD individuals, including the incidence of cancer and cancer‐related mortality; (2) cancer center practices that are welcoming and affirming to TGD patients; (3) the need for awareness and intentionality in the spaces of diagnosis and treatment for cancer; (4) the inevitable conclusion that gender differences exist but much more needs to be learned about the impact of gender‐affirming therapy, consisting of gender‐affirming surgeries and gender‐affirming hormone therapy, on cancer therapy; and (5) the efficacy and perceived safety of antineoplastic therapy and gender‐affirming hormone therapy.

26 March 2020 in American Journal of Hospice and Palliative Medicine®
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
ECElizabeth J. Cathcart-Rake
Elizabeth J. Cathcart-Rake
JOJennifer O’COnnor
Jennifer O’COnnor
JRJennifer L. Ridgeway
Jennifer L. Ridgeway
CBCarmen Radecki Breitkopf
Carmen Radecki Breitkopf
JKJudith S. Kaur
Judith S. Kaur
AJAminah Jatoi
Aminah Jatoi
Objective: This study sought to understand the patients’ perspective of what contributes to an absence of discussions of sexual orientation (SO), gender identity (GI), and sexual health in cancer care. Methods: Patients were recruited from oncology, gynecology, and a gender transition clinic to participate in semistructured interviews, which were analyzed with qualitative methods. Results: A total of 25 patients were interviewed, shedding light on 2 themes. The first was that these conversations are important but infrequent. One patient explained, “…. we know people who have had sex changes…[they] would have appreciated that question.” In response to whether sexual health was ever brought up, one patient responded, “No doctor ever has.” Patients described unaddressed issues: “There have been times, you know, we’ve wondered if it was okay to make love.” The second theme consisted of 4 pragmatic, patient-provided points to facilitate discussions: (1) implementation of a scale of 1 to 10 (with 10 being comfortable) to first gauge patients’ comfort in talking about SO, GI, and sexual health; (2) having the health-care provider explore the topic again over-time; (3) making sure the health-care provider is comfortable, as such comfort appears to enhance the patient’s comfort (“I have a doctor here, a female doctor, who just matter of fact will ask if I get erections and so on because of the medication she’s giving me);” and (4) eliminating euphemisms (one patient stated, “I don’t know what you mean by ‘sexual health’.”). Conclusion: Oncology health-care providers have a unique opportunity and responsibility to address SO, GI, and sexual health.