Determinants of stage at diagnosis of HPV-related cancer including area deprivation and clinical factors

Realizing the Potential of Social Determinants Data: A Scoping Review of Approaches for Screening, Linkage, Extraction, Analysis and Interventions

Background

Social determinants of health (SDoH) like socioeconomics and neighborhoods strongly influence outcomes, yet standardized SDoH data is lacking in electronic health records (EHR), limiting research and care quality.

Methods

We searched PubMed using keywords "SDOH" and "EHR", underwent title/abstract and full-text screening. Included records were analyzed under five domains: 1) SDoH screening and assessment approaches, 2) SDoH data collection and documentation, 3) Use of natural language processing (NLP) for extracting SDoH, 4) SDoH data and health outcomes, and 5) SDoH-driven interventions.

Results

We identified 685 articles, of which 324 underwent full review. Key findings include tailored screening instruments implemented across settings, census and claims data linkage providing contextual SDoH profiles, rule-based and neural network systems extracting SDoH from notes using NLP, connections found between SDoH data and healthcare utilization/chronic disease control, and integrated care management programs executed. However, considerable variability persists across data sources, tools, and outcomes.

Discussion

Despite progress identifying patient social needs, further development of standards, predictive models, and coordinated interventions is critical to fulfill the potential of SDoH-EHR integration. Additional database searches could strengthen this scoping review. Ultimately widespread capture, analysis, and translation of multidimensional SDoH data into clinical care is essential for promoting health equity.

Socioeconomic Barriers to Randomized Clinical Trial Retention in Patients Treated With Adjuvant Radiation for Early-Stage Breast Cancer

PURPOSE

Socioeconomic barriers contribute to breast cancer clinical trial enrollment disparities. We sought to identify whether socioeconomic disadvantage also is associated with decreased trial retention.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

We performed a secondary analysis of 253 (of 287) patients enrolled in a randomized phase 3 trial of conventionally fractionated versus hypofractionated whole-breast irradiation. The outcome of trial retention versus dropout was defined primarily based on whether the patient completed breast cosmesis outcomes assessment at 3-year follow-up, and secondarily, at 5-year follow-up. Associations of retention with severity of socioeconomic disadvantage, quantified by patients' home neighborhood area deprivation index (ADI) rank (1 [least] to 100 [most deprivation]), were tested using the Kruskal-Wallis test and multivariate logistic regression. Associations of retention with patients' use of social resource assistance were analyzed using the χ² test.

RESULTS

In total, 21.7% (n = 55) of patients dropped out by 3 years and 36.7% (n = 92) by 5 years. Median ADI was 36.5 (interquartile range, 22-57) for retained and 46.0 (interquartile range, 29-60) for dropout patients. Dropout was associated with more severe socioeconomic deprivation (ADI ≥45 vs <45) at 3 years (odds ratio, 3.63; 95% confidence interval, 1.62-8.15; P = .002) and 5 years (odds ratio, 2.55; 95% confidence interval, 1.37-4.76; P = .003). While on study, patients who ultimately dropped out were more likely to require resource assistance for practical (transportation, housing, financial) than psychological needs (distress, grief) or advance care planning (P = .03).

CONCLUSIONS

In this study, ADI was associated with disparities in clinical trial retention of patients with breast cancer receiving adjuvant radiation treatment. Results suggest that developing multidimensional interventions that extend beyond routine social determinants needs screening are needed, not only to enhance initial clinical trial access and enrollment but also to enable robust long-term retention of socioeconomically disadvantaged patients and improve the validity and generalizability of reported long-term trial clinical and patient-reported outcomes.

The Use of Area-Level Socioeconomic Indices in Evaluating Cancer Care Delivery: A Scoping Review

BACKGROUND

Multiple composite indices of small-area socioeconomic characteristics have been used to examine how neighborhood characteristics influence cancer care, but there is little consensus regarding how to use them. This scoping review aimed to summarize the use of these indices in cancer literature and their association with outcomes.

METHODS

A search was conducted to identify studies from 2015 to 2021 that investigated cancer incidence, disease stage at diagnosis, and mortality using area-based indices of deprivation as an independent variable. Studies were screened and assessed for eligibility. Data were extracted regarding the geospatial and statistical use of these indices.

RESULTS

All the inclusion criteria were met by 45 studies. The area level of analysis was at the census tract level in 19 studies (42.3%), the county level in 15 studies (33.3%), the block group level in 6 studies (13.3%), and the ZIP code level in 5 studies (11.1%). Altogether, 18 unique indices were used, with 4 indices used most frequently. Of the studies that used their indices ordinally, 3 defined high and low deprivation dichotomously, 10 used tertiles, 13 used quartiles, and 15 used quintiles. Of the 45 studies, 34 (76%) showed a significant association between area deprivation and cancer-related outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

Neighborhood deprivation indices are most commonly used at the census tract level and ordinally as quintiles. Despite variance in methods, there is a strong indication that deprived areas are at adverse odds with cancer-related outcomes. Further study investigating deprivation in the context of cancer can inform drivers of inequity and identify potential targets for care delivery and policy interventions.