Background In 2012, the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) released a hotly-debated recommendation against prostate-specific antigen (PSA) testing for all men. The present research examines African Americans’ beliefs about their susceptibility to prostate cancer (PCa) and the effectiveness of PSA testing in the context of the controversy surrounding this recommendation. Methods This study used a qualitative design to examine perceptions regarding susceptibility along with screening and facilitators of and barriers thereof. Data were collected at a community health center and three predominantly African American churches in North Carolina. Study participants were 46 African American men and women who attended one of four “listening sessions” for pretesting PCa educational materials (average age: 55 years). One-and-a-half-hour listening sessions were conducted to pretest materials; while presenting the materials, researchers probed beliefs and knowledge about PCa screening. The sessions were recorded and transcribed, and the transcripts were qualitatively analyzed using grounded theory. Results The four emergent themes indicated that participants: (1) cited behavioral, psychosocial, and biological reasons why African American men have higher PCa risk compared to others; (2) knew about the controversy and had varying responses and intentions; (3) believed screening could save lives, so it should be utilized regardless of the 2012 recommendation; and (4) felt that women can help men go to the doctor and make screening decisions. Conclusions Health education efforts to help community members understand health controversies, screening options, and how to make informed screening decisions are critical.

Objective: Evidence suggests peer support (PS) is as an effective strategy for enhancing prevention and control of chronic and infectious diseases, including cancer. This systematic scoping review examines the range and variety of interventions on the use of PS across the cancer care continuum. Method: We used a broad definition of PS to capture a wide-range of interventions and characterize the current status of the field. Literature searches were conducted using PubMed, SCOPUS, and CINAHL to identify relevant articles published from January 2011 – June 2016. We screened the title and abstracts of 2087 articles, followed by full-text screening of 420 articles, resulting in a final sample of 242 articles of which the most recent 100 articles were reviewed (published June 2014 – May 2016). Results: A number of the recent intervention studies focused on breast cancer (32%, breast cancer only) or multiple cancer sites (23%). Although the interventions spanned all phases of the cancer care continuum, only 2% targeted end-of-life care. Seventy-six percent focused on clinical outcomes (e.g., screening, treatment adherence) and 72% on reducing health disparities. Interventions were primarily phone-based (44%) or delivered in a clinic setting (44%). Only a few studies (22%) described the impact of providing PS on peer supporters. Conclusion: PS appears to be a widely used approach to address needs across the cancer care continuum, with many opportunities to expand its reach.

Research across the cancer care continuum indicates peer support can improve patient outcomes, yet little is known about how cancer peer support programs are implemented in practice. This study aimed to describe cancer peer support programs in "real world" (i.e., non-research) settings. A web search identified 100 programs in a wide variety of settings and locations; 48 published contact information on their website and were invited to participate in semi-structured interviews. Twenty-nine program leaders participated. From the interviews, we observed eight primary themes, which centered on challenges and responses regarding training and content of peer support services as well as program organization and support. Obstacles include inconsistent funding, reliance on volunteers, and physician concerns about peer supporters' advice to patients, while increasing diversity, reach, and accessibility are future priorities. Peer support should be recognized and funded as a routine part of cancer care in order to expand its reach and address priorities such as increasing the diversity of supporters and those they help.

Despite the high burden of prostate cancer in African American communities, there is a paucity of knowledge about prostate health. This paper describes the enhancement of a curriculum for training lay health advisors, called prostate cancer ambassadors, on informed decision-making for prostate cancer screening. Adult learning theory informed the structuring of the training sessions to be interactive, self-directed, and engaging. Trainings were developed in a manner that made the material relevant to the learners and encouraged co-learning. The research team developed strategies, such as using discussions and interactive activities, to help community members weigh the pros and cons of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screening and to make an informed decision about screening. Furthermore, activities were developed to bolster four social cognitive theory constructs: observational learning, self-efficacy for presenting information to the community and for making an informed decision themselves, collective efficacy for presenting information to the community, and outcome expectations from those presentations. Games, discussions, and debates were included to make learning fun and encourage discovery. Practice sessions and team-building activities were designed to build self-efficacy for sharing information about informed decision-making. Topics added to the original curriculum included updates on prostate cancer screening, informed decision-making for screening, skills for being a lay health advisor, and ethics. This dynamic model and approach to lay health advisor (ambassador) training is flexible: while it was tailored for use with prostate cancer education, it can be adjusted for use with other types of cancer and even other diseases.

BACKGROUND Longer lifespans conferred by antiretroviral therapy result in more time exposed to cancer risk for people living with HIV/AIDS (PLWHA). Given limited diversity in AIDS Malignancy Consortium (AMC) clinical trials, there is need for new approaches to educate PLWHA in order to improve awareness and participation in AMC trials. METHODS With input from a community advisory board, Project ACCRUE (AMC Clinical Trials at Carolina Ramp Up Enrollment) conducted a key informant interview with service providers; online organizational surveys of AMC trial awareness and resource needs; and “lunch and learn” educational sessions, including pre- and post-intervention knowledge assessments. RESULTS Providers indicated that transportation, mistrust of the medical community, and affordability were barriers to trial participation, while printed educational materials could facilitate trial recruitment. Providers indicated that their clients had concerns about participating in trials, but also recognized several benefits of participation including access to medical personnel and treatment, receipt of monetary incentives, and a feeling of satisfaction from helping others. In lunch and learn sessions, use of an audience response system to collect questionnaire data improved scores on knowledge-based items [S(55) = 460; P < .0001] compared to a pencil and paper test [S(20) = 12.5; P = .6541]. LIMITATIONS Generalizability may have been compromised by the small sample size. Long-term recall was not measured, and the short retest interval may have impacted post-intervention assessments. CONCLUSIONS Service providers recognize the benefits of working with researchers to educate patients about HIV-related cancers and participation in clinical trials. Lunch and learn sessions improved knowledge and perceptions about clinical trials for PLWHA.