The Impact of Racial, Geographic, and Socioeconomic Risk Factors on the Development of Advanced-Stage Cervical Cancer

Survival differences by race and surgical approach in early-stage operable cervical Cancer

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate if the higher rate of open radical hysterectomy in Black patients, prior to the widespread return to open surgical techniques, mitigated survival disparities and to identify other actionable factors to target for systemic change.

METHODS

This is a retrospective cohort study including patients from the National Cancer Database with cervical cancer who underwent radical hysterectomy from 2010 to 2018. Patient demographics, clinical characteristics and survival were compared by race and surgical route. Kaplan-Meier plots were constructed. Cox proportional hazards modeling was used to adjust for covariates.

RESULTS

7201 patients were eligible for inclusion, 687 (9.5%) Black and 4870 (68%) White. We found that 51% of Black patients and 39% of White patients underwent open surgery. Black patients were 10% less likely to receive Guideline Concordant Care (GCC). Those with publicly-funded insurance had a 40% higher hazard of death compared to private insurance (CI 1.19-1.73 p < 0.001). Black patients who had open surgery had similar 5-year survival compared to White patients who had MIS surgery (0.90 vs 0.91, NS). After adjusting for potential confounders including age, insurance, nodal status, and lymphovascular space invasion, Black patients who had surgery had a 40% higher hazard for death (HR 1.40 95% CI 1.10-1.79, p = 0.007) compared to White patients.

CONCLUSIONS

A lower 5 and 10-year survival was seen in Black patients, regardless of surgical approach. Adjustment for significant covariates did not resolve this disparity, confirming that these factors do not fully account racial disparities.

Black and hispanic women have less support during cancer evaluation and treatment: results from a prospective patient reported outcomes program in gynecologic malignancy

OBJECTIVE

Race remains a significant predictor of poor outcomes in women with gynecologic cancer and minority patients consistently report worse quality of life during cancer treatment. Disparities between patients in strength of social and emotional supports may contribute to these outcomes. This study's objective was to describe the racial differences in patient reported outcomes of women being evaluated or treated for a gynecologic malignancy at a large tertiary cancer hospital.

METHODS

In this prospective cohort study, all patients presenting for care at a tertiary care gynecologic oncology clinic between January 2018 and September 2019 were evaluated for inclusion. All patients were administered validated patient reported outcome measure questionnaires at serial visits. Demographic data was gathered including self-reported race. Patients were characterized as White, Black, Asian, Hispanic/Latino, or Other. Patient reported outcomes were compared between respondents of different races using linear and logistic regression.

RESULTS

Between January 2018 to September 2019, 2022 patients with a known race completed questionnaires. Of these patients, 86.7% were White, 4.3% Black, and 4.9% Hispanic/Latino and 58.7% had a known cancer diagnosis. Non-White patients were significantly less likely to complete questionnaires (p<0.001). Non-White patients reported significantly lower levels of emotional support on all questions (Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) emotional support: Q1 p<0.001, Q2 p<0.001, Q3 p=0.013, Q4 p=0.002), and lower overall emotional (p=0.005) and instrumental (p=0.005) support scores when compared with White patients. Hispanic/Latino patients reported the lowest levels of emotional and instrumental support and more cognitive (p=0.043) and financial (p=0.040) difficulties associated with treatment. Black women reported having less support with chores while sick (p=0.014) and being less likely to have someone to talk to (p=0.013).

CONCLUSIONS

Significant differences exist in patient reported outcomes between women of different racial backgrounds. Hispanic/Latino and Black women have less support during gynecologic cancer evaluation and treatment as compared with White women.

Rural-Urban Disparities in Cancer Outcomes: Opportunities for Future Research

Cancer care disparities among rural populations are increasingly documented and may be worsening, likely because of the impact of rurality on access to state-of-the-art cancer prevention, diagnosis, and treatment services, as well as higher rates of risk factors such as smoking and obesity. In 2018, the American Society of Clinical Oncology undertook an initiative to understand and address factors contributing to rural cancer care disparities. A key pillar of this initiative was to identify knowledge gaps and promote the research needed to understand the magnitude of difference in outcomes in rural vs nonrural settings, the drivers of those differences, and interventions to address them. The purpose of this review is to describe continued knowledge gaps and areas of priority research to address them. We conducted a comprehensive literature review by searching the PubMed (Medline), Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library databases for studies published in English between 1971 and 2021 and restricted to primary reports from populations in the United States and abstracted data to synthesize current evidence and identify continued gaps in knowledge. Our review identified continuing gaps in the literature regarding the underlying causes of rural-urban disparities in cancer outcomes. Rapid advances in cancer care will worsen existing disparities in outcomes for rural patients without directed effort to understand and address barriers to high-quality care in these areas. Research should be prioritized to address ongoing knowledge gaps about the drivers of rurality-based disparities and preventative and corrective interventions.

Cancer Etiology and Prevention Principle: "1 + X"

Cancer was previously thought to be an inevitable aspect of human health with no effective treatments. However, the results of in-depth cancer research suggest that most types of cancer may be preventable. Therefore, a comprehensive understanding of the disparities in cancer burden caused by different risk factors is essential to inform and improve cancer prevention and control. Here, we propose the cancer etiology and prevention principle "1 + X," where 1 denotes the primary risk factor for a cancer and X represents the secondary contributing risk factors for the cancer. We elaborate upon the "1 + X" principle with respect to risk factors for several different cancer types. The "1 + X" principle can be used for precise prevention of cancer by eliminating the main cause of a cancer and minimizing the contributing factors at the same time.

Patient reported outcome measures among patients with vulvar cancer at various stages of treatment, recurrence, and survivorship

OBJECTIVE

Our goal was to pragmatically describe patient reported outcomes (PROs) in a typical clinic population of vulvar cancer patients, as prior studies of vulvar cancer PROs have examined clinical trial participants.

METHODS

A prospective PRO program was implemented in the Gynecologic Oncology clinic of a tertiary academic institution in January 2018. Vulvar cancer patients through September 2019 were administered the European Organization for the Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of life Questionnaire, the Patient Reported Outcome Measurement Information System Instrumental and Emotional Support Scales, and the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Vulvar questionnaire. Binary logistic regressions were performed to determine adjusted odds ratios for adverse responses to individual questions by insurance, stage, age, time since diagnosis, recurrence, radiation, and surgical radicality.

RESULTS

Seventy vulvar cancer patients responded to PROs (85.4% response rate). Seventy-one percent were > 1 year since diagnosis, 61.4% had stage I disease, and 28.6% recurred. Publicly insured women had less support and worse quality of life (QOL, aOR 4.15, 95% CI 1.00-17.32, p = 0.05). Women who recurred noted more interference with social activities (aOR 4.45, 95% CI 1.28-15.41, p = 0.019) and poorer QOL (aOR 5.22 95% CI 1.51-18.10, p = 0.009). There were no major differences by surgical radicality. Those >1 year since diagnosis experienced less worry (aOR 0.17, 95% CI 0.04-0.63, p = 0.008).

CONCLUSIONS

Surgical radicality does not affect symptoms or QOL in vulvar cancer patients, whereas insurance, recurrence, and time since diagnosis do. This data can improve counseling and awareness of patient characteristics that would benefit from social services referral.

Understanding Posttreatment Patient-Provider Communication and Follow-Up Care Among Self-Identified Rural Cancer Survivors in Illinois

PURPOSE

As disparities in rural-urban cancer survivorship rates continue to widen, optimizing patient-provider communication regarding timely follow-up care is a potential mechanism to improving survivorship-related outcomes. The current study examines sociodemographic and health predictors of posttreatment patient-provider communication and follow-up care and associations between written communication and timely follow-up care for cancer survivors who identify as rural.

METHODS

Data were analyzed from posttreatment cancer survivor respondents of the Illinois Rural Cancer Assessment Study. The current study tested associations between sociodemographic variables and health factors on the quality of patient-provider communication and timely posttreatment follow-up care, defined as visits ≤ 3 months posttreatment, and associations between the receipt of written patient-provider communication on timely posttreatment follow-up care.

RESULTS

Among 90 self-identified rural cancer survivors, respondents with annual incomes < $50,000 and ≤ High School diploma were more likely to report a high quality of posttreatment patient-provider communication. Posttreatment written communication was reported by 62% of the respondents and 52% reported timely follow-up visits during the first 3 years of posttreatment care. Patients who reported receiving written patient-provider communication were more likely to have timely posttreatment follow-up care after completing active treatment than patients who had not received written patient-provider communication.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings suggest that written patient-provider communication improved timely follow-up care for self-identified rural cancer survivors. This research supports policy and practice that recommend the receipt of written survivorship care plans. Implementation of written survivorship care recommendations has the potential to improve survivorship care for rural cancer survivors.

Cervical cancer outcome by type of health care facilities: National Cancer Database, 2004-2015

The National Cancer Database from 2004 to 2015 was analyzed to identify cervical cancer outcomes associated with demographic and clinical characteristics measured by types of facility. Chi-Square tests were used to compare proportions and logistic regression to determine factors associated with cervical cancer outcomes. Women treated at Academic/Research Programs (ARPs) were younger at diagnosis, more likely black, less educated and more in Stage 2, lived further away from treatment facilities, had less comorbidities and better 5-year survival, and were more likely to be alive at 30 and 90 days after surgery compared to other programs. Women treated at Community Cancer Programs were more likely 75 and older at diagnosis, more likely to receive radiation treatment and more in Stage 4, more living in rural areas and less than 10 miles from the facility, and had more comorbidities, and lower 5-year survival compared to other programs. Women treated at Comprehensive Community Cancer Programs were more likely white and educated, had more private insurance, and underwent surgery. Women treated at Integrated Network Cancer Programs were more likely to live in urban, south region, and in Stage 1B2, had more surgery and one comorbidity, and died fewer than 30 days after surgery. The type of facility and treatment had varied effects on mortality and 5-year survival. Considering the different cervical cancer outcomes from different health care facilities, further research is needed to identify what factors influence women to choose a health care facility for their treatment and how this choice can affect different health outcomes.