Preventative Cancer Screening Rates Among Uninsured Patients in Free Clinics: A Retrospective Cohort Study of Cancer Survivors and Non-cancer Survivors

Temporal Trend in Uptake of the National General Health Checkups and Cancer Screening Program among Korean Women with Breast Cancer

PURPOSE

This study assessed the temporal trends of uptake of national general health and cancer screening among women with breast cancer in Korea between 2009 and 2016.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed the claims data from the Korean National Health Insurance Service database. Participants included 101,403 breast cancer patients diagnosed between 2009 and 2016. Information on participation in national screening programs, including breast cancer screening, general health, and gastric, colorectal, and cervical cancers, up to 2020 was collected. Screening participation rates within the first 2 and 5 years postdiagnosis were calculated by diagnosis year and fitted with joinpoint regression models to assess temporal trends.

RESULTS

Overall, the participation rate in breast cancer screening within 2 years postdiagnosis increased from 10.9% to 14.0% from 2009-2016, with an annual percentage change (APC) of 3.7% (p < 0.05). The participation rate in breast cancer screening was lower than that in general health checkup and screening for other cancers within 2 and 5 years postdiagnosis. A steady increase in screening trends was also observed for general health, gastric, colorectal, and cervical cancers, with APC of 5.3%, 5.7%, 6.9%, and 7.6% in the 2-year postdiagnosis rate, and APC of 3.6%, 3.7%, 3.7%, and 4.4% in 5-year postdiagnosis rate, respectively. The screening rate was highest among age groups 50-59 and 60-69 in 2009 and significant upward trends were observed in all age groups for general health checkup and gastric, colorectal, and cervical cancer screening.

CONCLUSION

Among female breast cancer survivors in Korea, the uptake rate of screenings for general health and various cancers, including breast, gastric, colorectal, and cervical cancers, has shown a gradual increase in recent years.

Colorectal cancer screening utilization among breast, cervical, prostate, skin, and lung cancer survivors

PURPOSE

To examine whether sociodemographic characteristics, access to care, risk behavior factors, and chronic health conditions were associated with colorectal cancer (CRC) screening utilization among breast, cervical, prostate, skin, and lung cancer survivors.

METHODS

We analyzed the 2020 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS) data on 9780 eligible cancer survivors. Descriptive statistics and multivariable logistic regression models were applied to assess the association between guideline-concordant CRC screening and the mentioned characteristics.

RESULTS

Overall, 81.9%, 65%, 88%,78.1%, and 80.1% of breast, cervical, prostate, skin, and lung cancer survivors received CRC screening, respectively (p-value < 0.001). In multivariable analysis, breast, cervical, and skin cancer survivors aged 60 years or older were associated with higher odds of receiving CRC screening. Respondents that had their recency of routine checkup two or more years before had lower odds of having CRC screening among cervical (OR = 0.06; 95% CI, 0.02-0.22), prostate (OR = 0.26; 95% CI, 0.14-0.49), and skin cancer (OR = 0.50; 95% CI, 0.36-0.70) survivors. The presence of chronic diseases was also associated with guideline-concordant CRC screening among breast, prostate, and skin cancer survivors.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings provide important evidence on potential factors that are associated with guideline-concordant CRC screening utilization across different cancer survivors, which include older age, recency of routine checkup, and multiple chronic diseases. Moreover, variation in CRC screening utilization across cancer survivors may highlight missed opportunities for secondary cancer prevention.

IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS

Establishing clear CRC screening guidelines and including patient-provider communication on recommendation in cancer survivorship care may increase adherence to CRC screening.

Social Determinants of Health in Imaging-based Cancer Screening: A Case-based Primer with Strategies for Care Improvement

Health disparities, preventable differences in the burden of disease and disease outcomes often experienced by socially disadvantaged populations, can be found in nearly all areas of radiology, including emergency radiology, neuroradiology, nuclear medicine, image-guided interventions, and imaging-based cancer screening. Disparities in imaging-based cancer screening are especially noteworthy given the far-reaching population health impact. The social determinants of health (SDoH) play an important role in disparities in cancer screening and outcomes. Through improved understanding of how SDoH can drive differences in health outcomes in radiology, radiologists can effectively provide patient-centered, high-quality, and equitable care. Radiologists and radiology practices can become active partners in efforts to assist patients along their imaging journey and overcome existing barriers to equitable cancer screening care for traditionally marginalized populations. As radiology exists at the intersection of diagnostic imaging, image-guided diagnostic intervention, and image-guided treatment, radiologists are uniquely positioned to design these strategies. Cost-effective and socially conscious strategies that address barriers to equitable care can improve both public health and equitable health outcomes. Potential strategies include championing supportive health policy, reducing out-of-pocket costs, increasing price transparency, improving education and outreach efforts, ensuring that appropriate language translation services are available, providing individualized assistance with appointment scheduling, and offering transportation assistance and childcare. ©RSNA, 2023 Quiz questions for this article are available in the supplemental material.

County-level disparities in care for patients with glioblastoma

OBJECTIVE

Racial and socioeconomic disparities in neuro-oncological care for patients with brain tumors remain underexplored. This study aimed to analyze county-level disparities in glioblastoma (GBM) care in the United States, focusing on access to surgery and the use of adjuvant temozolomide chemotherapy and radiation therapy.

METHODS

Using repeated cross-sectional data from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results 17 database; the Area Health Resources File; and the American Community Survey, from 2010 to 2019, the authors performed multivariate regression analyses to understand the associations between county-level racial and socioeconomic characteristics, as well as the rates of surgery performed, delays in surgery, and use of adjuvant chemotherapy and radiation therapy for newly diagnosed GBM.

RESULTS

In total, 29,609 GBM patients from 602 different US counties over a decade were included in this study. Counties with lower rates of surgery for GBM were associated with a higher percentage of Black residents (coefficient [CE] -0.001, 95% CI -0.002 to 0; p < 0.05) and being located in the Midwest (CE -0.132, 95% CI -0.195 to -0.069; p < 0.001) or West (CE -0.127, 95% CI -0.189 to -0.065; p < 0.001) relative to the Northeast. Counties with delayed surgical treatment were more likely to lack neurosurgeons (adjusted OR [aOR] 2.52, 95% CI 1.77-3.60; p < 0.001), have a higher percentage of Black residents (aOR 1.011, 95% CI 1.00-1.02; p < 0.05), and be located in the Midwest (aOR 3.042, 95% CI 1.12-8.24; p < 0.05) or West (aOR 3.175, 95% CI 1.12-8.97 p < 0.05). Counties with high rates of adjuvant radiation therapy were less likely to have higher percentages of Black residents (aOR 0.987, 95% CI 0.980-0.995; p < 0.01) and uninsured individuals (aOR 0.962, 95% CI 0.937-0.987; p < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

Counties without neurosurgeons and those with a higher percentage of Black patients have delays in surgical care and demonstrate lower overall rates of surgery and adjuvant therapy for GBM. This study underscores the need for targeted interventions and policies that address structural barriers in healthcare access, improve equitable distribution of the neurosurgery workforce, and ensure timely and comprehensive GBM care to all populations.