Abstract IA008: Racial disparities in guideline-concordant endometrial cancer treatment
Authors: Felix Ashley S. 
Published: March 2024

Mortality associated with endometrial cancer is 98% higher among Black as compared with White women. A large body of literature has evaluated differential treatment patterns as a potential determinant of increased mortality among Black women. In most studies, receipt of individual endometrial cancer treatment components (i.e., surgery, radiation, chemotherapy) is compared between Black and White women. Moreover, individual treatment components are typically considered binary variables (received vs. not received) with the received category reflecting a wide spectrum of treatments received. For example, women who receive one vs. six cycles of chemotherapy would be similarly labeled as receiving chemotherapy, despite a clear difference in treatment intensity. In contrast, recent studies have begun to evaluate racial and ethnic differences in the complete course of treatment as a unit, within the context of established guidelines. The National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines provide evidence-based endometrial cancer treatment recommendations based on clinical trials and observational research. Surgery is the first step of guideline-concordant treatment and pathology factors captured from surgery inform adjuvant treatment recommendations. Since the distribution of tumor characteristics that guide treatment recommendations varies between Black and White women, we should expect racial differences in use of adjuvant radiation and chemotherapy. However, when conceptualizing treatment as guideline-concordant vs. discordant, racial and ethnic differences clearly signal disparate quality of care. In this presentation, we will discuss the need for research on endometrial cancer treatment disparities to shift from a paradigm of exploring individual treatment components to one in which receipt of guideline-concordant treatment is the focus. Moreover, through the lens of a recently funded grant, we will discuss the value of using an explicit disparities definition in analyses of guideline-concordant treatment, which allows for decomposition of the sources of racial and ethnic disparities. Differences in healthcare related to clinical need or preference are not considered sources of disparities, reflecting the normative view that these differences are acceptable, and therefore, just. On the other hand, unjust sources of disparities include the operation of healthcare systems, the legal and regulatory climate, and discrimination, among other factors. In addition to the selection of a rigorous and nuanced disparities definition, future research on guideline-concordant treatment disparities should investigate the role of multilevel factors that reflect the social determinants of health. Cancer health disparities are entrenched in the social determinants of health, which cannot be effectively addressed at the individual-level alone.

Citation Format: Ashley S. Felix. Racial disparities in guideline-concordant endometrial cancer treatment [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the AACR Special Conference on Endometrial Cancer: Transforming Care through Science; 2023 Nov 16-18; Boston, Massachusetts. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Clin Cancer Res 2024;30(5_Suppl):Abstract nr IA008.