Racial Comparisons in Timeliness of Colon Cancer Treatment in an Equal-Access Health System

Racial disparities in survival of early onset colon cancer (Age<50): A matched NCDB analysis

BACKGROUND

Early-onset colon cancer (EOCC) has increasing incidence and disproportionately affects African-Americans. This analysis aims to compare EOCC survival among Black and White patients after matching relevant socio-demographic factors and stage.

METHODS

The 2004-2017 NCDB database was queried for Black and White patients, age<50, who underwent colectomy for adenocarcinoma. A one-to-one match on race was performed based on sociodemographic factors and disease stage (I-IV). Five-year survival differences were analyzed with Cox proportional hazards models.

RESULTS

5322 Black-White matched pairs were analyzed. Compared to White patients, Black patients averaged more days to surgery (19 ​± ​68 vs 16 days ​± ​32, p ​< ​0.001) and to chemotherapy (63 ​± ​8 vs. 57 ​± ​39, p ​< ​0.001). Black stage III patients were 20% less likely to receive chemotherapy (OR 0.8, 95% CI 0.7-0.9, p ​= ​0.0006), and had a 17% increased rate of death (HR 1.17, 95% CI 1.0-1.3, p ​= ​0.01) after adjusting for sex, comorbidity score, tumor location and chemotherapy.

CONCLUSIONS

Black patients with stage 3 EOCC are less likely to receive chemotherapy and have worse survival. Further evaluation is warranted to identify potential factors driving these observed.

Medicaid expansion and racial disparity in timely multidisciplinary treatment in muscle invasive bladder cancer

BACKGROUND

Multidisciplinary cancer care (neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by radical cystectomy or trimodality therapy) is crucial for outcome of muscle-invasive bladder cancer (MIBC), a potentially curable illness. Medicaid expansion through Affordable Care Act (ACA) increased insurance coverage especially among patients of racial minorities. This study aims to investigate the association between Medicaid expansion and racial disparity in timely treatment in MIBC.

METHODS

This quasi-experimental study analyzed Black and White individuals aged 18-64 years with stage II and III bladder cancer treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by radical cystectomy or trimodality therapy from National Cancer Database 2008-2018. Primary outcome was timely treatment started within 45 days following cancer diagnosis. Racial disparity is the percentage-point difference between Black and White patients. Patients in expansion and nonexpansion states were compared using difference-in-differences and difference-in-difference-in-differences analyses, controlling for age, sex, area-level income, clinical stage, comorbidity, metropolitan status, treatment type, and year of diagnosis.

RESULTS

The study included 4991 (92.3% White, n = 4605; 7.7% Black, n = 386) patients. Percentage of Black patients who received timely care increased following the ACA in Medicaid expansion states (54.5% pre-ACA vs 57.4% post-ACA) but decreased in nonexpansion states (69.9% pre-ACA vs 53.7% post-ACA). After adjusting covariates, Medicaid expansion was associated with a net 13.7 percentage-point reduction of Black-White patient disparity in timely receipt of MIBC treatment (95% confidence interval = 0.5% to 26.8%; P < .01).

CONCLUSIONS

Medicaid expansion was associated with statically significant reduction in racial disparity between Black and White patients in timely multidisciplinary treatment for MIBC.

Racial disparities in time to laparoscopic cholecystectomy for acute cholecystitis

BACKGROUND

Disparities in healthcare exist, yet few data are available on racial differences in time from admission to surgery. This study aimed to compare time from admission to laparoscopic cholecystectomy for acute cholecystitis between non-Hispanic Black and non-Hispanic White patients.

METHODS

Patients who underwent laparoscopic cholecystectomy for acute cholecystitis from 2010 to 2020 were identified using NSQIP. Time to surgery and additional preoperative, operative, and postoperative variables were analyzed.

RESULTS

In the univariate analysis, 19.4% of Black patients experienced a time to surgery >1 day compared with 13.4% of White patients (p < 0.0001). In the multivariable analysis, controlling for potential confounding factors, Black patients were found to be more likely than White patients to experience a time to surgery >1 day (OR 1.23, 95% CI 1.17-1.30, p < 0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

Further investigation is indicated to better define the nature and significance of gender, race, and other biases in surgical care. Surgeons should be aware that biases may adversely impact patient care and should strive to identify and proactively address them to promote health equity in surgery.

MilCanEpi: Increased Capability for Cancer Care Research in the Department of Defense

The Military Health System (MHS) of the US Department of Defense (DoD) provides comprehensive medical care to over nine million beneficiaries, including active-duty members, reservists, activated National Guard, military retirees, and their family members. The MHS generates an extensive database containing administrative claims and medical encounter data, while the DoD also maintains a cancer registry that collects information about the occurrence of cancer among its beneficiaries who receive care at military treatment facilities. Collating data from the two sources diminishes the limitations of using registry or medical claims data alone for cancer research and extends their usage. To facilitate cancer research using the unique military health resources, a computer interface linking the two databases has been developed, called Military Cancer Epidemiology, or MilCanEpi. The intent of this article is to provide an overview of the MilCanEpi data system, describing its components, structure, potential uses, and limitations.

Time to treatment initiation and its impact on real-world survival in metastatic colorectal cancer and pancreatic cancer

BACKGROUND

Given the dearth of data regarding the time to treatment initiation (TTI) in the palliative setting, and its impact on survival outcomes, we sought to determine TTI in a real-world cohort of metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) and metastatic pancreatic cancer (mPC) patients and evaluate the impact of TTI on real-world survival outcomes.

METHODS

We collected survival and treatment data for mCRC and mPC from the Flatiron Health electronic health records (EHR) derived database. We divided TTI into 3 categories: < 2 weeks, 2-< 4 weeks, and 4-8 weeks, from diagnosis to first-line therapy. Outcome measures were median TTI, real-world overall survival (RW-OS) based on TTI categories by Kaplan-Meier method, and impact of TTI on survival using cox proportional hazard models.

RESULTS

Among 7108 and 3231 patients with mCRC and mPC treated within 8 weeks of diagnosis, the median TTI were 28 days and 20 days. Median RW-OS for mCRC was 24 months; 26.9 months versus 22.6 and 18.05 months in the 4-8-week, 2-< 4 week (control) and < 2-week groups, respectively (p < 0.0001). For mPC, median RW-OS was 8 months, without significant difference in RW-OS among the groups (p = 0.05). The 4-8-week group was associated with lower hazard of death (HR 0.782, 95% CI 0.73-0.84, p < 0.0001) and the < 2-week group was associated with a higher hazard of death (HR 1.26, 95% CI 1.15-1.38, p < 0.0001) in mCRC. The 4-8-week group was associated with lower hazard of death for mPC (HR 0.88, 95% CI 0.8-0.97, p = 0.0094).

CONCLUSION

In a real-world cohort of patients treated within 8 weeks of diagnosis, and with the limitations of a retrospective study, later TTI did not have a negative impact on survival outcomes in mCRC and mPC.

Clinical Delays and Comparative Outcomes in Younger and Older Adults with Colorectal Cancer: A Systematic Review

Outcome disparities between adults <50 with colorectal cancer (CRC) and older adults may be explained by clinical delays. This study synthesized the literature comparing delays and outcomes between younger and older adults with CRC. Databases were searched until December 2021. We included studies published after 1990 reporting delay in adults <50 that made comparisons to older adults. Comparisons were described narratively and stage between age groups was meta-analyzed. 39 studies were included representing 185,710 younger CRC patients and 1,422,062 older patients. Sixteen delay intervals were compared. Fourteen studies (36%) found significantly longer delays among younger adults, and nine (23%) found shorter delays among younger patients. Twelve studies compared time from symptom onset to diagnosis (N younger = 1538). Five showed significantly longer delays for younger adults. Adults <50 years also had higher odds of advanced stage (16 studies, pooled OR for Stage III/IV 1.76, 95% CI 1.52-2.03). Ten studies compared time from diagnosis to treatment (N younger = 171,726) with 4 showing significantly shorter delays for younger adults. All studies showing longer delays for younger adults examined pre-diagnostic intervals. Three studies compared the impact of delay on younger versus older adult. One showed longer delays were associated with advanced stage and worse survival in younger but not older adults. Longer delays among younger adults with CRC occur in pre-diagnostic intervals.

Time to diagnosis and treatment in younger adults with colorectal cancer: A systematic review

Background

The incidence of colorectal cancer is rising in adults <50 years of age. As a primarily unscreened population, they may have clinically important delays to diagnosis and treatment. This study aimed to review the literature on delay intervals in patients <50 years with colorectal cancer (CRC), and explore associations between longer intervals and outcomes.

Methods

MEDLINE, Embase, and LILACS were searched until December 2, 2021. We included studies published after 1990 reporting any delay interval in adults <50 with CRC. Interval measures and associations with stage at presentation or survival were synthesized and described in a narrative fashion. Risk of bias was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale, Institute of Health Economics Case Series Quality Appraisal Checklist, and the Aarhus Checklist for cancer delay studies.

Results

55 studies representing 188,530 younger CRC patients were included. Most studies used primary data collection (64%), and 47% reported a single center. Sixteen unique intervals were measured. The most common interval was symptom onset to diagnosis (21 studies; N = 2,107). By sample size, diagnosis to treatment start was the most reported interval (12 studies; N = 170,463). Four studies examined symptoms onset to treatment start (total interval). The shortest was a mean of 99.5 days and the longest was a median of 217 days. There was substantial heterogeneity in the measurement of intervals, and quality of reporting. Higher-quality studies were more likely to use cancer registries, and be population-based. In four studies reporting the relationship between intervals and cancer stage or survival, there were no clear associations between longer intervals and adverse outcomes.

Discussion

Adults <50 with CRC may have intervals between symptom onset to treatment start greater than 6 months. Studies reporting intervals among younger patients are limited by inconsistent results and heterogeneous reporting. There is insufficient evidence to determine if longer intervals are associated with advanced stage or worse survival.

Other

This study’s protocol was registered with the Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO; registration number CRD42020179707).

Racial Disparities in Colorectal Cancer Care for Black Patients: Barriers and Solutions

Racial disparities in colorectal cancer for Black patients have led to a significant mortality difference when compared to White patients, a gap which has remained to this day. These differences have been linked to poorer quality insurance and socioeconomic status in addition to lower access to high-quality health care resources, which are emblematic of systemic racial inequities. Disparities impact nearly every point along the colorectal cancer care continuum and include barriers to screening, surgical care, oncologic care, and surveillance. These critical faults are the driving forces behind the mortality difference Black patients face. Health care systems should strive to correct these disparities through both cultural competency at the provider level and public policy change at the national level.

Cancer statistics for African American/Black People 2022

African American/Black individuals have a disproportionate cancer burden, including the highest mortality and the lowest survival of any racial/ethnic group for most cancers. Every 3 years, the American Cancer Society estimates the number of new cancer cases and deaths for Black people in the United States and compiles the most recent data on cancer incidence (herein through 2018), mortality (through 2019), survival, screening, and risk factors using population-based data from the National Cancer Institute and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. In 2022, there will be approximately 224,080 new cancer cases and 73,680 cancer deaths among Black people in the United States. During the most recent 5-year period, Black men had a 6% higher incidence rate but 19% higher mortality than White men overall, including an approximately 2-fold higher risk of death from myeloma, stomach cancer, and prostate cancer. The overall cancer mortality disparity is narrowing between Black and White men because of a steeper drop in Black men for lung and prostate cancers. However, the decline in prostate cancer mortality in Black men slowed from 5% annually during 2010 through 2014 to 1.3% during 2015 through 2019, likely reflecting the 5% annual increase in advanced-stage diagnoses since 2012. Black women have an 8% lower incidence rate than White women but a 12% higher mortality; further, mortality rates are 2-fold higher for endometrial cancer and 41% higher for breast cancer despite similar or lower incidence rates. The wide breast cancer disparity reflects both later stage diagnosis (57% localized stage vs 67% in White women) and lower 5-year survival overall (82% vs 92%, respectively) and for every stage of disease (eg, 20% vs 30%, respectively, for distant stage). Breast cancer surpassed lung cancer as the leading cause of cancer death among Black women in 2019. Targeted interventions are needed to reduce stark cancer inequalities in the Black community.

Healthcare Disparities and Colorectal Cancer

Health care disparities are defined as health differences between groups that are avoidable, unnecessary, and unjust. Racial disparities in colorectal cancer mortality, particularly for Black patients, are well-described. Disparities in preventative measures, early detection, effective treatment, and posttreatment services contribute to these differences. Underlying these issues are patient, provider, health care system, and policy-level factors that lead to these disparities. Multilevel interventions designed to address each level of care can provide an effective means to mitigate these disparities.

Racial Disparities in the Management of Locoregional Colorectal Cancer

Racial disparities pervade nearly all aspects of management of locoregional colorectal cancer, including time to treatment, receipt of resection, adequacy of resection, postoperative complications, and receipt of neoadjuvant and adjuvant multimodality therapies. Disparate gaps in treatment translate into enduring effects on survivorship, recurrence, and mortality. Efforts to reduce these gaps in care must be undertaken on a multilevel basis and focus on modifiable factors that underlie racial disparity.

Screening and prevention of colorectal cancer

Mortality from colorectal cancer is reduced through screening and early detection; moreover, removal of neoplastic lesions can reduce cancer incidence. While understanding of the risk factors, pathogenesis, and precursor lesions of colorectal cancer has advanced, the cause of the recent increase in cancer among young adults is largely unknown. Multiple invasive, semi- and non-invasive screening modalities have emerged over the past decade. The current emphasis on quality of colonoscopy has improved the effectiveness of screening and prevention, and the role of new technologies in detection of neoplasia, such as artificial intelligence, is rapidly emerging. The overall screening rates in the US, however, are suboptimal, and few interventions have been shown to increase screening uptake. This review provides an overview of colorectal cancer, the current status of screening efforts, and the tools available to reduce mortality from colorectal cancer.

Disparities in Surgical Oncology: Management of Advanced Cancer

Significant variations in the patterns of care, incidence, and mortality rates of several common cancers have been noted. These disparities have been attributed to a complex interplay of factors, including genetic, environmental, and healthcare-related components. Within this review, primarily focusing on commonly occurring cancers (breast, lung, colorectal), we initially summarize the burden of these disparities with regard to incidence and screening patterns. We then explore the interaction between several proven genetic, epigenetic, and environmental influences that are known to contribute to these disparities.

Bias Issues in Colorectal Cancer Management: A Review

Based on census data, over one-third of the US population identifies as a racial or ethnic minority. This group of racial and ethnic minorities is more likely to develop cancer and die from it when compared with the general population of the USA. These disparities are most pronounced in the African American community. Despite overall CRC rates decreasing nationally and within certain racial and ethnic minorities in the USA, there continue to be disparities in incidence and mortality when compared with non-Hispanic Whites. The disparities in CRC incidence and mortality are related to systematic racism and bias inherent in healthcare systems and society. Disparities in CRC management will continue to exist until specific interventions are implemented in the context of each racial and ethnic group. This review's primary aim is to highlight the disparities in CRC among African Americans in the USA. For surgeons, understanding these disparities is formative to creating change and improving the quality of care, centering equity for all patients.

Conflicting Guidelines: A Systematic Review on the Proper Interval for Colorectal Cancer Treatment

BACKGROUND

Timely treatment for colorectal cancer (CRC) is a quality indicator in oncological care. However, patients with CRC might benefit more from preoperative optimization rather than rapid treatment initiation. The objectives of this study are (1) to determine the definition of the CRC treatment interval, (2) to study international recommendations regarding this interval and (3) to study whether length of the interval is associated with outcome.

METHODS

We performed a systematic search of the literature in June 2020 through MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane databases, complemented with a web search and a survey among colorectal surgeons worldwide. Full-text papers including subjects with CRC and a description of the treatment interval were included.

RESULTS

Definition of the treatment interval varies widely in published studies, especially due to different starting points of the interval. Date of diagnosis is often used as start of the interval, determined with date of pathological confirmation. The end of the interval is rather consistently determined with date of initiation of any primary treatment. Recommendations on the timeline of the treatment interval range between and within countries from two weeks between decision to treat and surgery, to treatment within seven weeks after pathological diagnosis. Finally, there is no decisive evidence that a longer treatment interval is associated with worse outcome.

CONCLUSIONS

The interval from diagnosis to treatment for CRC treatment could be used for prehabilitation to benefit patient recovery. It may be that this strategy is more beneficial than urgently proceeding with treatment.

Is the current referral trend a threat to the Military Health System? Perioperative outcomes and costs after colorectal surgery in the Military Health System versus civilian facilities

BACKGROUND

TRICARE military beneficiaries are increasingly referred for major surgeries to civilian hospitals under "purchased care." This loss of volume may have a negative impact on the readiness of surgeons working in the "direct-care" setting at military treatment facilities and has important implications under the volume-quality paradigm. The objective of this study is to assess the impact of care source (direct versus purchased) and surgical volume on perioperative outcomes and costs of colorectal surgeries.

METHODS

We examined TRICARE claims and medical records for 18- to 64-year-old patients undergoing major colorectal surgery from 2006 to 2015. We used a retrospective, weighted estimating equations analysis to assess differences in 30-day outcomes (mortality, readmissions, and major or minor complications) and costs (index and total including 30-day postsurgery) for colorectal surgery patients between purchased and direct care.

RESULTS

We included 20,317 patients, with 24.8% undergoing direct-care surgery. Mean length of stay was 7.6 vs 7.7 days for direct and purchased care, respectively (P = .24). Adjusted 30-day odds between care settings revealed that although hospital readmissions (odds ratio 1.40) were significantly higher in direct care, overall complications (odds ratio 1.05) were similar between the 2 settings. However, mean total costs between direct and purchased care differed ($55,833 vs $30,513, respectively). Within direct care, mean total costs ($50,341; 95% confidence interval $41,509-$59,173) were lower at very high-volume facilities compared to other facilities ($54,869; 95% confidence interval $47,822-$61,916).

CONCLUSION

Direct care was associated with higher odds of readmissions, similar overall complications, and higher costs. Contrary to common assumptions regarding volume and quality, higher volume in the direct-care setting was not associated with fewer complications.

Colorectal cancer statistics, 2020

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the second most common cause of cancer death in the United States. Every 3 years, the American Cancer Society provides an update of CRC occurrence based on incidence data (available through 2016) from population-based cancer registries and mortality data (through 2017) from the National Center for Health Statistics. In 2020, approximately 147,950 individuals will be diagnosed with CRC and 53,200 will die from the disease, including 17,930 cases and 3,640 deaths in individuals aged younger than 50 years. The incidence rate during 2012 through 2016 ranged from 30 (per 100,000 persons) in Asian/Pacific Islanders to 45.7 in blacks and 89 in Alaska Natives. Rapid declines in incidence among screening-aged individuals during the 2000s continued during 2011 through 2016 in those aged 65 years and older (by 3.3% annually) but reversed in those aged 50 to 64 years, among whom rates increased by 1% annually. Among individuals aged younger than 50 years, the incidence rate increased by approximately 2% annually for tumors in the proximal and distal colon, as well as the rectum, driven by trends in non-Hispanic whites. CRC death rates during 2008 through 2017 declined by 3% annually in individuals aged 65 years and older and by 0.6% annually in individuals aged 50 to 64 years while increasing by 1.3% annually in those aged younger than 50 years. Mortality declines among individuals aged 50 years and older were steepest among blacks, who also had the only decreasing trend among those aged younger than 50 years, and excluded American Indians/Alaska Natives, among whom rates remained stable. Progress against CRC can be accelerated by increasing access to guideline-recommended screening and high-quality treatment, particularly among Alaska Natives, and elucidating causes for rising incidence in young and middle-aged adults.