bluuebunny/crossref_metadata_2025 huggingface dataset:
A randomized controlled trial of the effect of a community-based intervention on patient activation, health-related quality of life, and acute care use.
Authors: Patel Manali I. , Khateeb Sana Indravadan , Krajcinovic Ivana , Salava Deb , Coker Tumaini
Published: September 2021

1

Background: Low-income and minority populations have disproportionately less activation in their cancer care, worse health-related quality of life (HrQOL), and greater acute care use than affluent and white populations. Community-based interventions are needed to improve patient experiences and quality of cancer care among these populations. We used community-based participatory methods to refine a previously tested intervention for use in Atlantic City NJ. The intervention, LEAPS, uses community health workers trained to activate patients to discuss advance care planning and their symptom burden with cancer clinicians and to connect patients with culturally-relevant community resources to overcome complications from social determinants of health. We conducted a randomized controlled trial of LEAPS in collaboration with a employer-union health fund. Members of the employer-union health fund with newly diagnosed with hematologic and solid tumor cancers were randomized to the 6-month intervention or to usual care. The objective was to determine if the intervention improved HrQOL at 4 months post-enrollment as compared to baseline more than usual care and secondarily the effect on change in patient activation at 4 months post-enrollment as compared to baseline and acute care use within 12 months post-enrollment. Methods: We conducted patient interviews to assess HrQOL and patient activation and obtained claims data for health care use. We used regression models to evaluate differences in health-related quality of life (validated Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General) scores and patient activation (validated Patient Activation Measure) scores between groups over time and exact poisson regression adjusted for length of follow-up to compare emergency department and hospitalization utilization. Results: A total of 160 patients were consented and randomized into the study (80 intervention; 80 control). There were no differences in demographic or clinical factors across groups. The majority were non-white (74%), female (53%), mean age 57 years. The most common diagnoses were breast (31%) and lung (21%) cancer and the majority were diagnosed with stage 3 or 4 (63%). At 4 months, the intervention group had greater improvements in quality of life as compared to the control group (difference in difference: 9.56 p < 0.001), greater change in patient activation (difference in difference: 12.43 (p < 0.001)), and lower acute care use (hospital visits (1.10 (1.53) +/- 1.83 (1.31), p = 0.02) and emergency department use (1.2 (2.82) versus 3.47 (3.62) p = 0.03). Conclusions: Integration of community-based interventions into cancer care for low-income and minority populations may be a more effective and sustainable way to ensure equitable cancer care. Clinical trial information: NCT03699748.
Changes in systemic cancer therapy prior-authorization requests during the COVID-19 pandemic.
Authors: Parsons Helen , Zhao Jingxuan , Gupta Arjun , Henk Henry J. , Yabroff K. Robin
Published: September 2021

100

Background: The coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic transformed norms and approaches to delivering cancer care in the US throughout 2020. While initial reports in regional and single institution studies suggest postponement or modification of cancer treatments, limited evidence exists on the long-term national impact of COVID-19 on cancer treatment throughout the year. Methods: Using de-identified OptumLabs Data Warehouse data, which includes data from the Optum Cancer Guidance Program’s electronic prior authorization (ePA) platform, we compared monthly rates (per 100,000 person-months) of requests for authorization for insurance coverage of systemic cancer therapy in January-December 2020 (COVID) versus January-December 2019 (non-COVID). Results: We identified a total of 94,726 prior-authorization requests for chemotherapy in 2020 compared to 106,272 requests in 2019, indicating a 10.8% overall decline during the pandemic. Prior-authorization request rates were 6.3% higher in March 2020 as many stay-at-home orders were implemented across states (Table). Prior authorization requests then significantly declined in April and May 2020 (3.3% and 14.4% lower rates in 2020 vs. 2019) during the stay-at-home orders before briefly increasing again in June. As COVID-19 infections and deaths increased throughout the fall, requests for prior-authorization significantly declined in each month from August through December 2020. Conclusions: The COVID-19 pandemic led to significant overall declines in requests for prior authorizations for chemotherapy in 2020 versus 2019. While requests rebounded somewhat in early spring and summer of 2020, rates were markedly lower, relative to those in 2019, during COVID-19’s second wave. Overall, these results suggest continued modifications or delays in cancer treatment that may result in worse outcomes for individuals with cancer in 2020 and should be evaluated in future studies. [Table: see text]
Asian American ethnic subgroup disparities in time to surgical treatment for breast cancer in the California Cancer Registry.
Authors: Navarro Stephanie , Yang Yifei , Ochoa Carol , Mejia Aaron , Kim Sue , Liu Lihua , Lerman Caryn , Farias Albert
Published: September 2021

101

Background: Health risks and outcomes among Asian American patients are not adequately understood when Asians are treated as a homogenous ethnic group. This work is the first to explore trends in time to surgical treatment for breast cancer amongst Asian American ethnic subgroups. Methods: We used data from the population-based California Cancer Registry to identify a cohort of females diagnosed with invasive breast cancer between 2012-2017 in California. Time to surgical treatment was defined as the time elapsed between definitive diagnosis of breast cancer and receipt of surgery. Covariates included individual patient sociodemographic, health history, and tumor characteristics. Multivariable logistic regression was used to determine the odds of receiving surgery within 30 and 90 days of breast cancer diagnosis and multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression was used to analyze the likelihood of shorter time to surgery. A Bonferroni corrected alpha level was used to account for multiple racial/ethnic group comparisons. Results: Of 106,441 breast cancer patients, 57% were non-Hispanic white (NHW), 21% were Hispanic, 14% were Asian (4% Filipino; 3% Chinese; 1% each of Asian Indian or Pakistani (AIP), Vietnamese, Japanese, and Korean; 3% other Asian), and 6% were non-Hispanic black (NHB). Compared to NHWs, Hispanics (OR = 0.86, 99.5% CI = 0.82-0.92) and NHBs (OR = 0.82, 99.5% CI = 0.76-0.90) were less likely to receive surgery within 30 days of breast cancer diagnosis, while Chinese (OR = 1.30, 99.5% CI = 1.17-1.45) and AIPs (OR = 1.24, 99.5% CI = 1.04-1.48) were more likely to receive surgery within 30 days. These trends persisted for Hispanic (OR = 0.87, 99.5% CI = 0.79-0.96), NHB (OR = 0.73, 99.5% CI = 0.63-0.85), and Chinese patients (OR = 1.33, 99.5% CI = 1.04-1.71) when analyzing the likelihood of receiving surgery within 90 days of diagnosis. Compared to NHWs, Hispanics (OR = 0.94, 99.5% CI = 0.92-0.97), NHBs (OR = 0.88, 99.5% CI = 0.85-0.91), and Vietnamese (OR = 0.90, 99.5% CI = 0.83-0.98) were less likely to experience shorter time to surgical treatment, while Chinese (OR = 1.15, 99.5% CI = 1.09-1.21) and AIPs (OR = 1.09, 99.5% CI = 1.01-1.18) were more likely to have shorter time to surgery. Conclusions: In this population-based study of the California Cancer Registry, trends in time to surgical treatment for breast cancer were not consistent for patients belonging to different Asian ethnic subgroups. While Chinese and AIP patients tended to receive surgery sooner than NHW patients, Vietnamese patients face a disparity in receiving timely surgical treatment relative to NHW patients. Further research is needed to fully understand and appropriately target disparities in breast cancer treatment for patients of different Asian American ethnic subgroups.
Cancer treatment and outcomes in patients of color or ethnic minority (PCEM): Oncologist perceptions of racial anxiety and/or implicit bias (RA/IB).
Authors: Gajra Ajeet , Jeune-Smith Yolaine , Balanean Alexandrina
Published: September 2021

104

Background: Healthcare disparities are prevalent in cancer, with patients of color or ethnic minority (PCEM) at greatest risk for poor outcomes due to limited access to care, low health literacy and socioeconomic status, and potentially, racial anxiety and/or implicit bias (RA/IB) among oncologists. We conducted a descriptive study of medical/hematologic oncologists to assess perceptions of impact of RA/IB on treatment decisions and outcomes in PCEM. Methods: From February to April 2021, U.S.-based medical/hematologic oncologists participated in an online survey of perceptions regarding cancer care and outcomes in PCEM as part of a broader survey of various clinical and practice-related concerns. Questions used a modified 5-point Likert scale with an option of declining to answer, and respondents were aware that data would be anonymized and aggregated. Results: Among the 369 physicians surveyed, median years in practice were 17 (range 2-49). Most (72%) worked in community oncology; 64% were age 40 to 59 years; 21% identified as female, 70% as male, and 9% declined to disclose gender. Racial distribution was 32% White, 33% Asian, 7% Black, 4% Hispanic/Latinx, and 19% declined to disclose. Regarding perception of the degree of racial/ethnic healthcare disparity experienced by PCEM, 33% chose moderate, 29% very high/high, 29% low/none, and 8% declined to answer. Regarding how often RA/IB adversely affected survival among PCEM at their own practice, a majority (58%) chose rarely or never, 33% very often/almost always, often, or sometimes, and 9% declined to answer. Perceived frequency of specific scenarios involving RA/IB as adversely influencing treatment decisions at their practice (referral/recommendation for oncologic standard-of-care [SOC] modalities/services) was also assessed. The combinations of very often/almost always, often, and sometimes responses were: clinical trial referral (35%); palliative/hospice care (31%); novel therapeutic regimen vs. SOC selection (e.g., chemo/targeted/radiation therapy) (28%); surgical treatment recommendation (26%); and genetic/genomic testing referral (24%). Notably, 10% to 12% declined to answer. Conclusions: A majority of the medical/hematologic oncologists surveyed recognized the role of RA/IB in substandard treatment and outcomes among PCEM, but were less likely to perceive it within their own practice, suggesting a need for better identification. Notably, 24% to 35% recognized its adverse influence on SOC treatment decisions for PCEM. Further, 19% declined to identify their own race/ethnicity and 10% consistently declined to answer all treatment decision-making questions related to disparity, suggesting mistrust or apprehension in expressing true views. Findings suggest that oncologists may benefit from improved education regarding RA/IB and healthcare disparities in PCEM.
Addressing cancer care needs for Latino adults: A formative qualitative evaluation.
Authors: Rodriguez Gladys M. , Leach Maria , Osorio Jennifer , Wood Emily , Duron Ysabel , O'Brien Dale G. , Zach Koontz , Goldman Rosas Lisa , Patel Manali I.
Published: September 2021

105

Background: Cancer remains the number one cause of death among the Latino population despite the decrease in cancer incidence and mortality in the United States. Latino patients experience worse quality of life, more advanced stages of disease, and longer times to definitive diagnosis and treatment initiation. Yet there are few interventions that leverage clinical and community-based approaches to address these disparities. The aim of this formative qualitative study was to explore the specific care needs and barriers encountered by Latino patients to refine a community-based intervention delivered by community health workers (CHWs). Methods: We conducted semi-structured, in-depth, one-on-one qualitative interviews with low-income, Latino adults with a past or current history of cancer and/or their caregivers in a county comprised of 80% Latino populations in California. Interviews were conducted in Spanish, audio-recorded, transcribed and translated. Analysis was based in grounded theory and performed using the constant comparative method. Results: Fourteen interviews were conducted with a total of 18 participants; 9 involved the patient, 4 involved the patient and a designated caregiver, and 1 involved a caregiver only. Four major themes emerged that included: 1) lack of overall understanding of all aspects of cancer including their cancer diagnosis, significance of advance directives, precision medicine, and cancer care plans; 2) severe challenges in communicating cancer care needs and receiving support services due to language barriers; 3) stress and anxiety regarding financial hardships related to job loss and insurance barriers; 4) the need for supportive, bilingual and bicultural personnel to assist in overcoming these challenges. Conclusions: Latino patients with cancer and caregivers described major barriers they encounter after a cancer diagnosis. Participants described important approaches to address these cancer specific needs and reduce cancer disparities among these populations.
Compliance with the National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines for evaluation and treatment of anemia among patients with solid tumors.
Authors: Hufnagel Demetra , Bos Lia Manfredi , Brown Alaina J. , Prescott Lauren S.
Published: September 2021

11

Background: Anemia is associated with increased morbidity, mortality and decreased quality of life among oncology patients. The National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) recommends evaluation and treatment of anemia in patients with cancer. There is a paucity of data investigating compliance with the NCCN guidelines. Methods: A retrospective study of patients diagnosed with any malignant solid tumor at our institution from 2008-2017 was performed. Tumor-registry-confirmed cancer cases were identified using International Classification of Disease-Oncology (ICD-O) codes in the Synthetic Derivative (SD) database, a de-identified copy of the electronic medical record. Patients were included if they were between the ages of 18 and 89 and had a hemoglobin (hgb) within 6 months of diagnosis. Patients were excluded if they had more than one tumor registry entry. Anemia was defined as hgb ≤11g/dL and graded using the CTCAE v.5.0. Absolute and possible functional iron deficiency were defined by NCCN guidelines. B12 and folate deficiency were defined by institutional reference values. Chi-squared tests were conducted in R (Version 3.4.4). P <.05 was interpreted as statistically significant. Results: A total of 25,018 patients met inclusion criteria. The median age was 60 years, and the most common malignancies were respiratory tract, prostate, and urologic (11% each, respectively). Of the 25,018 patients, 1,484 (17%) were noted to be anemic at time of diagnosis and 11,019 (44%) were anemic within 6 months of diagnosis. Of these patients, a plurality (N = 4,686, 43%) had grade 2 anemia and a majority (N = 9,623, 87%) had normocytic anemia. Patients with retroperitoneal/peritoneal cancers had the highest prevalence of anemia (N = 83, 75%). A total of 4,125 (37%) underwent any evaluation of their anemia, of which 1,742 (16%) had iron studies performed and 1,528 (14%) had B12 or folate studies performed. Of those with iron studies performed, 197 (11%) patients had absolute iron deficiency and 103 (6%) had possible functional iron deficiency. Of those with B12 labs, 74 (5%) had B12 deficiency and of those with folate labs, 69 (12%) had folate deficiency. Less than half of anemic patients (N = 4,318, 39%) received treatment for anemia, including blood transfusion (N = 3,528, 32%), oral iron (N = 1,279, 12%), or IV iron (N = 97, 1%). However, treatment of anemia significantly increased as grade of anemia increased (any treatment among mild: 12%; moderate: 31%; severe: 77%; χ2 [2, N = 11,019] = 3020.6; P <.001). Patients with male reproductive tract cancers had the highest prevalence of anemia evaluation (N = 57, 79%). Conclusions: Anemia is common in patients with solid tumors, yet compliance with NCCN guidelines for evaluation and treatment of anemia remains low. There are opportunities to improve compliance with NCCN guidelines for management of anemia across the spectrum of cancer care.
Association of lung cancer incidence and COVID-19 case fatality with income level in Ohio.
Authors: Desai Rohan , Wadhwa Raoul , Scott Jacob
Published: September 2021

110

Background: Social determinants of health (SDOH) have an impact of health and quality-of-life. However, most models of clinical disease and risk calculators do not incorporate SDOH. Many diseases have residual, unexplained risk after known risk factors have been incorporated. SDOH is important component of this residual risk and resources should be allocated to study their relation to disease. Here, we investigate the role of SDOH on the incidence and severity of respiratory diseases by evaluating the association of income level with lung cancer incidence and COVID-19 case fatality ratio in the state of Ohio. Methods: Socioeconomic data for the state of Ohio was manually collected. Lung cancer incidence was acquired from the National Cancer Institute’s online portal. COVID-19 case fatality ratios were downloaded from Johns Hopkins University’s GitHub repository. All three datasets contained complete information for each of Ohio’s 88 counties and were merged by county name. The first two datasets are up-to-date as of 2019, while the COVID-19 data was up-to-date as of 22 May 2021. Data manipulation, visualization, and statistical inference was conducted in the R programming language. Results: Median county-level income across Ohio was $52,722 (IQR: 47,273-59,166). Median county-level lung cancer incidence was 68.4 per 100,000 population (IQR: 62.0-80.6) and median COVID-19 case fatality ratio was 1.98% (IQR: 1.65-2.36). Data for counties with highest and lowest median income are shown in table. Lung cancer incidence and COVID-19 case fatality ratio were not significantly correlated ( n = 88, p > 0.05). Median income was significantly correlated with both, lung cancer incidence ( r = -0.49, p < 0.001) and COVID-19 case fatality ratio ( r = -0.41, p < 0.001). This implies that 24% of the variation in lung cancer incidence and 17% of the variation in COVID-19 case fatality ratio in counties across Ohio can be explained by median county income. Conclusions: SDOH is significantly associated with the incidence and severity of infectious and oncologic respiratory diseases. This association is strengthened since the disease variables themselves are uncorrelated, decreasing the likelihood of confounding. COVID-19 incidence was not used because of uncertainty in the mechanism of SDOH affecting transmission. However, theories suggest that oncologic incidence and infectious disease treatment are affected by SDOH. We validate these theories and encourage the incorporation of SDOH into clinical care and public health. Future directions include testing the association between income level and lung cancer severity in clinical datasets from medical institutions in Ohio.[Table: see text]
Patient-reported unfair treatment within the health care system.
Authors: Caston Nicole E. , Williams Courtney , Gallagher Kathleen D. , Angove Rebekah , Anderson Eric , Balch Alan James , Rocque Gabrielle Betty
Published: September 2021

115

Background: Patients with cancer who perceive discrimination and unfair treatment from the health care system are at risk for lower health-related quality of life. This study seeks to better understand the characteristics of under-resourced patients who report unfair treatment from the health care system and providers. Methods: This cross-sectional analysis used data from a nationwide survey distributed in December 2020 by Patient Advocate Foundation (PAF), a US non-profit organization providing case management and financial aid to individuals with chronic illness. The survey was fielded via email to those who received PAF services from July 2019-April 2020. Inclusion criteria included a valid e-mail address, aged ≥ 19, and either current or previous cancer treatment. Respondents reported unfair treatment in connection to their health care. Age, sex, race/ethnicity, and annual household income were abstracted from the PAF database. The validated Group-Based Medical Mistrust Scale was used to assess respondents’ level of mistrust in medical providers as it relates to their ethnic group. Scores range from 12-60 and were categorized based on tertiles as high mistrust (scores ≥ 29), neutral (21-28), and low mistrust (≤ 20). Frequencies and percentages were calculated for categorical variables. Results: There were a total of 429 survey respondents with cancer. Most respondents were female (73%) and aged 56-75 (57%); 31% were Black, Indigenous, or Persons of Color (BIPOC). The most common cancer types were hematologic (33%) and breast (33%). Overall, 20% (n = 86) of respondents reported having received unfair treatment. Of those reporting unfair treatment, 56% reported receipt from their doctor, nurse, or health care provider, 51% insurance company, 38% the health care system, and 14% pharmacist. When asked why they felt unfairly treated, the most common responses were related to insurance status (51%), disease or condition (45%), and income (35%). Notably, unfair treatment due to race/ethnicity (6%), sex (9%), and sexual orientation/gender expression (3%) were uncommon. When compared to those who reported objective treatment, respondents reporting unfair treatment were more often unemployed/other (28% vs 11%), privately insured (38% vs 27%), having income < $23,000 (40% vs 25%), having 3+ comorbidities (40% vs 23%) and reporting more mistrust in medical providers (53% vs 27%). There did not appear to be a difference in reporting of unfair treatment by race/ethnicity. Of BIPOC respondents, 51% reported high mistrust in medical providers. Conclusions: This under-resourced population of respondents with cancer reported unfair treatment related to their finances, insurance, and disease status. Our data suggest health care-associated discrimination may occur based on socioeconomic resources. This work identifies a novel equity consideration warranting further evaluation.
Racial and ethnic disparities in nasopharyngeal cancer with an emphasis among Asian Americans.
Authors: Wang Qian , Xie Hui , Jiang Changchuan , Zhang Yaning , Li Yannan , Theodoropoulos Nicholas , Boffetta Paolo
Published: September 2021

118

Background: Nasopharyngeal cancer (NPC) is characterized by a distinct geographic distribution which reflects genetic predispositions, with highest incidence in Southeastern Asia and Southern China. It continues to cause a significant health burden among Asian Americans (AAs), which is a fast growing but understudied racial group. Prior studies investigating NPC combined all AA groups which may mask heterogeneities among AA subgroups. We aimed to examine the disparities in NPC by dividing AAs into four major ethnic groups - Chinese, Filipinos, Vietnamese, and Japanese Americans. Methods: NPC cases were identified from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Result (SEER) 18 database from 1975-2016. Information regarding age, sex, race/ethnicity, education, income, % of foreign born, marital status, region of SEER registry, stage, histology, grade, surgery, chemotherapy, and radiation therapy were extracted. Multivariate-adjusted Cox proportional hazard regression and Fine-Gray sub-distribution hazard models were used to calculate overall and cause-specific mortality. SEER*Stat was used to calculated age-adjusted incidence. Results: Among a total of 11,737 NPC patients, 42.2% were non-Hispanic White (NHW), 10.7% non-Hispanic Black (NHB), 7.1% Hispanics, 18.9% Chinese, 7.6% Filipinos, 4.8% Vietnamese, 1.0% Japanese and 7.7% other Asians. AAs continue to have the highest NPC incidence among all racial groups despite of an overall decreasing trend. Japanese were significantly more likely to be diagnosed at localized stage, having low grade tumor and having keratinizing squamous cell carcinoma histology compared to other AAs. Compared to NHW, Filipino Americans had decreased mortality (HR = 0.90; 95%CI:0.84-0.98). Chinese (HR = 0.95; 95%CI: 0.90-1.01), and Vietnamese (HR = 0.94; 95%CI: 0.86-1.03) also observed marginally reduced mortality but not Japanese Americans (HR = 1.09; 95%CI: 0.90-1.32). No differences in NPC-specific mortality by race/ethnicity groups were found. In addition, Chinese, Filipino and Vietnamese Americans with NPC were less likely to die of other cancer and cardiovascular disease than NHW, but no such differences were observed among NHB, Hispanics or Japanese Americans. Conclusions: Asian Americans have been historically studied as one single racial group mostly due to limited sample size, despite that it is consistent of a diverse population with different genetic makeup, socioeconomic status, cultural background, health behaviors, and health care access. Our novel finding that significant disparities exist within AA NPC patients in regard to demographic and clinical features, overall and cause-specific mortality underlines the importance of adequate AA-subgroup specific sample size in future studies in order to understand the prognostic role of ethnicity in NPC, and advocates more ethnically and culturally tailored cancer care delivery.
Treatment delays in older women with nonmetastatic breast cancer treated at minority-serving hospitals.
Authors: Song Julia , Mittendorf Elizabeth A. , King Tari A. , Minami Christina Ahn
Published: September 2021

122

Background: Almost 60% of breast cancer in the U.S. occur in women aged >65, but these women are less likely to receive guideline-concordant care. Given existing treatment disparities by race/ethnicity, older minority women may be especially prone to potential gaps in breast cancer care. Hospitals serving higher proportions of minority patients are at risk to deliver suboptimal care, but how site of care impacts aging patients with breast cancer is not well defined. We sought to evaluate the association between race/ethnicity and breast cancer treatment delays in older women treated at minority-serving hospitals (MSH) vs non-MSHs. Methods: Women >65 years old with non-metastatic breast cancer diagnosed from 2010-2017 were identified in the National Cancer Database using data from Commission on Cancer (CoC)-accredited hospitals. Treatment delay was defined as >90 days from diagnosis to first treatment (surgery, chemotherapy, endocrine therapy). MSHs were defined as the top decile of hospitals serving predominantly Black or Hispanic patients. Multivariable logistic regression models adjusted for patient, disease, and hospital characteristics were used to determine the odds of treatment delay for women at MSHs vs non-MSHs across racial/ethnic groups. Results: 529,128 women (84.5% non-Hispanic White, 3.3% Hispanic White, 9.6% non-Hispanic Black, 0.1% Hispanic Black, 0.2% Native American, 2.5% Asian/Pacific Islander) were identified among 41 MSHs and 1,146 non-MSHs. Overall, time to treatment was <90 days in >95% of women (mean 33.4 days; standard deviation 26.4 days). Older women regardless of race at MSHs were more likely to suffer treatment delays than those at non-MSHs (odds ratio 1.31; 95% confidence interval 1.22-1.41). Compared to non-Hispanic White women, all minority groups had a higher likelihood of treatment delay regardless of MSH status (Table). Conclusions: Although most older women with non-metastatic breast cancer treated at CoC hospitals received care in a timely fashion, minorities and those treated at MSHs were more likely to experience treatment delays. Effective interventions addressing barriers to timely care at MSHs and among racial/ethnic minorities are needed. [Table: see text]
Identifying barriers to equitable biomarker testing in underserved patients with NSCLC: A mixed-methods study to inform quality improvement opportunities.
Authors: Boehmer Leigh , Basu Roy Upal Kunal , Schrag Janelle , Martin Nikki A. , Salinas Gregory D. , Coleman Brandon , Howson Alexandra , Shivakumar Latha
Published: September 2021

123

Background: Despite recent advances in cancer precision medicine, patients from underserved communities do not have equal access to biomarker testing and targeted therapies. This study used a mixed-methods approach to identify barriers to equitable precision medicine access among underserved patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Methods: Paired national surveys (one clinician-facing and one patient-facing) were developed respectively by the Association of Community Cancer Centers (ACCC) and LUNGevity Foundation. Administered online in spring/summer 2020, the surveys were designed to identify key attitudes/barriers related to biomarker testing, resource needs, and current practice patterns for pertinent stakeholders. Survey data was triangulated with data from focus groups (2 clinician and 6 patient) conducted in fall 2020. The study was approved by Advarra IRB. Results: A total of 99 clinicians responded, with 67% (66/99) representing oncologists from community cancer programs. 248 patients responded to the LUNGevity survey, with 161 coming from the general population and 87 from the LUNGevity network (patients with relatively high income and education levels). Most clinicians surveyed indicated they were “very” (34%) or “extremely” likely (44%) to discuss biomarker testing with NSCLC patients. Academic clinicians, however, were more likely than community-based clinicians to order testing at the time of initial biopsy (76% vs 52%, P =.02). Academic clinicians were also more likely to involve the patient’s family in biomarker testing discussions (85% vs 59%, P =.009). Patient survey results identified that medical oncologists are the primary source of biomarker testing information; 64% of LUNGevity-connected and 37% of underserved patients. Eighty-five percent of LUNGevity-connected patients receive biomarker testing versus 52% for general patients (p < 0.05). Notably, more than a quarter (27%) of underserved patients who have undergone biomarker testing do not know their results. Clinician focus group participants corroborated survey findings that most clinicians receive testing results in 7-14 days, but for 23% of community and 6% of academic clinicians the process can take over 2 weeks. They identified disparities in offering biomarker testing and results to patients with known or presumed low socioeconomic status (SES) and/or health literacy. This was supported by patient survey data, which showed biomarker testing was proactively offered to only 40% of low-SES patients. Conclusions: This study identifies key areas of ongoing need related to equitable biomarker testing. Quality-improvement opportunities exist to address both clinician and patient barriers to guideline-concordant biomarker testing for underserved patients with NSCLC.
The association of sexual orientation with prostate, breast, and cervical cancer screening and diagnosis.
Authors: Herriges Michael Joseph , Pinkhasov Ruben , Lehavot Keren , Shapiro Oleg , Jacob Joseph M , Sanford Thomas , Liu Nick , Bratslavsky Gennady , Goldberg Hanan
Published: September 2021

129

Background: Data on heterogeneity in cancer screening and diagnosis rates among lesbians/gays and bisexuals is lacking. Recent studies showed that lesbians/gays and bisexuals have decreased healthcare utilization compared to heterosexual counterparts and continue to experience discrimination in healthcare. Few studies have examined how sexual orientation impacts cancer screening and prevalence. We, therefore, investigated the association between sexual orientation and prevalent sex-specific cancer including prostate, breast, and cervical cancer. Methods: This was a cross-sectional survey-based US study, including men and women aged 18+ from the Health Information National Trends Survey (HINTS) database between 2017-2019. The primary endpoint was individual-reported prostate, breast, and cervical cancer screening and prevalence rates among heterosexual and LGB men and women. Multivariable logistic regression analyses assessed association of various covariates with undergoing screening and diagnosis of these cancers. Results: Overall, 4,441 and 6,333 heterosexual men and women, respectively, were compared to 225 and 213 lesbian/gay and bisexual men and women, respectively. Lesbians/gays and bisexuals were younger and less likely to be screened for prostate, breast, and cervical cancer than heterosexuals. A higher proportion of heterosexual women than lesbian and bisexual women were screened for cervical cancer with pap smears (95.36% vs. 90.48% and 86.11%, p = < 0.001) and breast cancer with mammograms (80.74% vs. 63.81% and 45.37%, p = < 0.001). Similarly, a higher proportion of heterosexual men than gay and bisexual men were screened for prostate cancer with PSA blood tests (41.27% vs. 30.53% and 27.58%, p = < 0.001). Conclusions: Lesbians/gays and bisexuals in the US may be less likely to undergo screening of sex-specific prevalent malignancies, including prostate, breast, and cervical cancer. Healthcare professionals should be encouraged to improve cancer screening among lesbians/gays and bisexuals.
Differences by race in systemic oncologic end-of-life (EOL) care among patients with cancer.
Authors: Adelson Kerin B. , Wang Xiaoliang , Ascha Mustafa , Miksad Rebecca A. , Showalter Timothy N , Calip Gregory Sampang , Gross Cary Philip , Canavan Maureen
Published: September 2021

137

Background: Prior studies indicate that Black patients with cancer are more likely to receive aggressive EOL care, including chemotherapy within 14 days (d) prior to death. However, most studies are limited to specific subgroups, and it is unclear if disparities remain in the immunotherapy era. In this study, we evaluated racial differences in systemic oncologic EOL treatment among a national all-payer cohort of patients treated in routine practice. Methods: We conducted a retrospective cohort study utilizing data from the nationwide Flatiron Health electronic health record (EHR)-derived de-identified database. Patients with confirmed cancer diagnosis, with documented treatment on or after 1/1/2011 and who died between 2015 and 2019, were included. Patients with documented race of White or Black or African American were included. We defined our outcome measures as receipt of any systemic oncologic treatment within 30d or 14d prior to death, and also stratified by mono-chemotherapy (Chemo) and immunotherapy ± targeted therapy (ICI). We used mixed-level logistic regression models to assess the likelihood of receiving each treatment, compared to patients without any EOL treatment, between Black and White patients, adjusted for patient- and practice-level characteristics as fixed effects and a practice-specific random intercept. Race-specific adjusted rates were estimated using stratified analysis. Results: A total of 40,675 White and 5,150 Black patients were included in the analysis. Compared to White patients, Black patients were younger at diagnosis, were more likely to be female and have Medicaid coverage. Black patients were more likely to be treated at practices with higher patient-to-physician ratio (25.8% in highest quintile vs. 18.7%) and with a high proportion (> 10%) of patients with Medicaid (38.1% vs. 31.6%). Compared to White patients within the same practice, Black patients were less likely to receive any EOL treatment within 30d (adjusted odds ratio [aOR]: 0.87; 95% CI: 0.81-0.93) or 14d (aOR: 0.87; 95% CI: 0.80-0.96). Adjusted rates of any EOL treatment within 30d prior to death were 33.8% and 37.6% among Black and White patients, respectively. When stratified by treatment types, Black patients were less likely to receive ICI within 30d prior to death, compared to White patients (aOR: 0.87; 95% CI: 0.76-1.00). Conclusions: Our findings differ from prior studies of oncologic EOL care and suggest that in contemporary practice Black patients are less likely to receive anti-cancer therapy near EOL, largely driven by lower rates of ICI use. Future research should investigate the complex causal pathway underlying observed racial differences among patient and practice-level factors.
Promotion of prostate cancer screening equity: A quality improvement education initiative.
Authors: Stevens Hobbs Kristen , Farrington Thomas , McGlone Andrew , Leiba Lawrence Roxanne , Jacobs Ginny , Lazure Patrice , McFadden Pamela , Hall Laura Lee
Published: September 2021

140

Background: Black men are disparately affected by prostate cancer (PC). They are more likely to develop PC and at an earlier age when the disease is more advanced at diagnosis. As a result, Black men are two to three times more likely to die from PC than white men. Given these disparities, experts increasingly promote screening for PC in Black men at a younger age. Methods: To inform implementation of a quality improvement education (QIE) project in three primary care practices in Maryland, a zip code analysis of the prevalence of PC was performed. Maryland practices were selected due to higher rates of PC in regions of the state and significant Black populations (Table). The QIE initiative started with a baseline practice assessment survey (including information on panel size, patient demographics, PC screening/treatment approaches, and barriers) and an analysis of current PC screening rates. Health system leaders and champions from the practice sites received training on patient-centered conversations with high-risk Black patients and concerning QIE planning. The champions developed rapid cycle improvement plans to implement increased screening using a patient-oriented online educational platform ( Dr. PSA ), as well as posters, and placards for patient education. Results: The overall national prevalence of PC in Medicare Fee-for-Service Program beneficiaries in 2018 was 2.65%. For Black beneficiaries the overall prevalence was 2.89%. Prevalence for beneficiaries in specific Maryland zip codes are detailed in Table. *Data not available; Source: NMQF Prostate Cancer Index Baseline practice assessment data revealed that patient panels ranged from 4,000 to 58,163 patients, with Black patients accounting for 50% or more of two of the practices and 25 to 50% of the third practice. Barriers to screening identified include financial issues, insurance restrictions, and lack of knowledge about PC and screening. Baseline screening rates are approximately 75%. Conclusions: Zip code prevalence analysis and baseline practice assessment data confirmed the relevance of implementing a QIE initiative in the three selected sites. Through a mixed-methods evaluation study, practice staff knowledge, attitudes, and self-reported practices will be assessed pre- and post-QIE initiative to assess impact of the initiative and determine opportunities for further improvement in PC screening practices.[Table: see text]
Interaction with patients of color or ethnic minority (PCEM): Oncologist perceptions of racial anxiety and/or implicit bias (RA/IB).
Authors: Balanean Alexandrina , Jeune-Smith Yolaine , Feinberg Bruce A. , Gajra Ajeet
Published: September 2021

141

Background: Oncologists interacting with PCEM may be unaware of RA/IB, yet data show lower-quality care. Helping oncologists recognize this may improve quality of patient-provider interaction, care, and outcomes. We conducted a descriptive study of medical/hematologic oncologists to assess perceptions of RA/IB impact on PCEM interaction. Methods: From February to April 2021, U.S.-based medical/hematologic oncologists participated in an online survey of perceptions on cancer care and outcomes in PCEM (part of broader survey of various clinical and practice-related concerns). Questions used a modified 5-point Likert scale with an option of declining to answer, and respondents were aware data would be anonymized and aggregated. Results: Among 369 physicians surveyed, median years in practice were 17 (range 2-49). Most (72.4%) were in community settings; 64.0% were age 40 to 59 years; 20.6% identified as female, 70.5% male, and 8.7% declined to disclose. Racial distribution was 32.0% White, 33.1% Asian, 7.0% Black, 4.1% Hispanic/Latinx, and 18.7% declined to disclose. When asked the degree of RA/IB White providers had toward PCEM, 39.6% chose low/none, 33.3% moderate, 14.9% high/very high, and 12.2% declined. When asked whether RA/IB among White providers adversely affects PCEM, 37.1% somewhat/strongly agreed, 29.3% somewhat/strongly disagreed, 23.6% neither agreed nor disagreed, and 10.0% declined. Also, 7.9% declined to estimate percent of non-White patients managed. Perceived frequency of scenarios involving RA/IB impacting PCEM interaction at their practices was also assessed (Table). Notably, 12.0% to 14.0% declined to answer regarding their own practices. Although most oncologists (76.4%) perceived RA/IB among White providers toward PCEM, only 37.1% agreed it had adverse effects. Conclusions: Discrepancy in perception of RA/IB among White providers and its effect on PCEM suggests a need to show causality, and declining to respond suggests mistrust/apprehension in expressing true views. Findings suggest oncologists may benefit from improved education and awareness regarding RA/IB in PCEM interaction, treatment, and outcomes. Provider responses (N=369).[Table: see text]
Association between utilization patterns and racial disparities in hospice enrollment among women dying of ovarian cancer.
Authors: Mullins Megan , Uppal Shitanshu , Cote Michele L. , Clarke Philippa , Ruterbusch Julie J. , Hawley Sarah T. , Wallner Lauren P.
Published: September 2021

142

Background: Goals of care conversations are associated with less aggressive end of life care and may be most effective in an outpatient setting. Yet, the relationship between initial utilization of care and subsequent hospice enrollment is unknown. We evaluated whether inpatient, outpatient and emergency department (ED) evaluation and management (E/M) visits differed by patient race/ethnicity, and whether less outpatient management was associated with failure to enroll in hospice in a sample of women dying of ovarian cancer. Methods: Women diagnosed with first and only ovarian cancer who died between 2000 and 2016 and had ≥ one inpatient and outpatient ovarian cancer E/M encounter between diagnosis and the last two months of life in SEER-Medicare were included (N = 8,806). Women whose proportion of outpatient E/M encounters fell below the median were classified as having low outpatient management (vs. high). Multivariable-adjusted logistic regression was used to estimate the association of: (1) race/ethnicity with outpatient management, and (2) outpatient management with hospice enrollment, stratified by race/ethnicity. Models were adjusted for stage at diagnosis, histology, survival time, age, Charlson score, geographic region, and year. Results: In this sample, 29.2% of ovarian cancer E/M took place in an inpatient setting, 66.4% outpatient, and 4.4% in the ED. Non-Hispanic Black women had 53.9% of their E/M occur in an outpatient setting, compared to 67.6% in non-Hispanic White women, 60.7% in Hispanic women, and 64.2% in women of other races (p <.001). Black women had 78% greater odds of low outpatient management when compared to non-Hispanic White women (adjusted OR 1.78, 95%CI: 1.46-2.18). Women with low (vs. high) outpatient management had 33% greater odds of not enrolling in hospice (adjusted OR 1.33, 95%CI: 1.20-1.48). The association of low outpatient management with not enrolling in hospice was most pronounced among Black women (Black adjusted OR: 1.54, 95%CI: 1.02-2.32 vs. Non-Hispanic White adjusted OR: 1.32, 95%CI: 1.18-1.48). Conclusions: Although most ovarian cancer care takes place in an outpatient setting, Black women have the lowest proportion of outpatient care, and low outpatient management was associated with not enrolling in hospice. When deploying interventions to improve goals of care conversations for women with ovarian cancer, racial/ethnic disparities in care settings must be considered.
Stage at cancer diagnosis during the COVID-19 pandemic in western Washington state.
Authors: Fedorenko Catherine R. , Kreizenbeck Karma L. , Li Li , Panattoni Laura Elizabeth , Shankaran Veena , Ramsey Scott David
Published: September 2021

145

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic disrupted medical care, including routine cancer screening for breast, colorectal, lung and cervical cancers. We aimed to investigate the impact of the pandemic on stage at diagnosis for cancer patients. Methods: Using data from the Washington State SEER records we compared AJCC stage for patients diagnosed with cancer in 2017-2019 to 2020 for two time periods, March to June (initial pandemic months) and July to December (later pandemic months). Patients were included if they were age 18+, diagnosed with a solid tumor, and not diagnosed at autopsy. Results: In the early phase of the pandemic, March – June 2020, there was a shift to cancers being diagnosed at a later stage compared to the same time period in 2017-2019 (Stage III: 13.5% to 14.9%, Stage IV: 16.2% to 19.7%). There was also a decrease in cancer diagnoses for cancers that are often detected through routine screening. As a percentage of all cancer diagnoses, both melanoma (13.2% to 9.8%) and colon cancer diagnoses (7.2% to. 6.7%) decreased during the early pandemic. In the later phase of the pandemic, July to December 2020, the stage at diagnosis showed an indication of returning to pre-pandemic levels with an increase in the proportion of early stage cancers (In situ: 16.6% to 19.3%, Stage I: 38.8% to 41.1%). Stage at diagnosis trends varied by tumor type. For colorectal cancer, the overall number of diagnoses decreased during the initial pandemic months. Stage I diagnoses decreased and Stage IV cancer diagnoses increased in both early and late stages of the pandemic. Conclusions: In Washington State, the COVID-19 pandemic had an impact on stage at diagnosis potentially caused by delays or interruptions in medical care. Additional studies are needed to understand how this shift in stage at diagnosis impacted treatment and outcomes for patients.