Racial and ethnic differences in colon cancer surgery type performed and delayed treatment among people 45 years old and older in the USA between 2007 and 2017: Mediating effect on survival.

BACKGROUND: This study examined the associations of socioeconomic status (SES), race/ethnicity, surgery type, and treatment delays with mortality among colon cancer patients. In addition, the study also quantifies the extent to which clinical and SES factors' variations explain the racial/ethnic differences in overall survival. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We studied 111,789 adult patients ≥45 years old who were diagnosed with colon cancer between 2010 and 2017, identified from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database. We performed logistic regression models to examine the association of SES and race/ethnicity with surgery type and first course of treatment delays. We also performed mediation analysis to quantify the extent to which treatment, sociodemographic and clinicopathologic factors mediated racial/ethnic differences in survival. RESULTS: Non-Hispanic (NH) Blacks [adjusted Odds Ratio (aOR) = 1.19, 95% CI:1.13-1.25] were significantly more likely to undergo subtotal colectomy and to experience treatment delays [aOR = 1.39, 95% CI: 1.31-1.48] compared to NH Whites. Hispanics [aOR = 1.59, 95% CI: 1.49-1.69] were more likely to experience treatment delays than NH Whites. Delayed first course of treatment explained 23.56% and 56.73% of the lower survival among NH Blacks and Hispanics, respectively, compared to their NH White counterparts. CONCLUSIONS: Race/ethnicity is significantly associated with the surgery type performed and the first course of treatment delays. Variations in treatment, SES, and clinicopathological factors significantly explained racial disparities in overall mortality. These disparities highlight the need for multidisciplinary interventions to address the treatment and social factors perpetuating racial disparities in colon cancer mortality.

Racial/ethnic and socioeconomic differences in breast cancer surgery performed and delayed treatment: mediating impact on mortality.

OBJECTIVE: Although Socioeconomic status (SES), race/ethnicity, surgical type, and treatment delays are associated with breast cancer mortality outcomes, studies on these associations have been contrasting. This study examined the racial/ethnic and SES differences in surgical treatment types and treatment delays. Also, we quantified the extent to which these differences explained the racial/ethnic disparities in breast cancer mortality. METHODS: We studied 290,066 women 40 + years old diagnosed with breast cancer between 2010 and 2017 identified from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database. We performed logistic regression models to examine the association of SES and race/ethnicity with surgical treatment type and treatment delays. We performed mediation analysis models to quantify the extent to which mortality differences were mediated by treatment, sociodemographic, and clinicopathologic factors. RESULTS: Non-Hispanic (NH) Black [Odds ratio (OR) = 1.16, 95% CI 1.13-1.19] and Hispanic women [OR = 1.27, 95% CI 1.24-1.31] were significantly more likely to undergo mastectomy compared to NH White women. Similarly, NH Black and Hispanic women had higher odds of delayed treatment than NH Whites. Patients in the highest SES quintile, compared to those in lowest the lowest, were less likely to experience breast cancer-specific mortality (BCSM). Variations in treatment, SES, and clinicopathological factors significantly explained 70% of the excess BCSM among NH Blacks compared to their NH White counterparts. CONCLUSIONS: Bridging the gap of access to adequate healthcare services for all to diminish the disproportionate burden of breast cancer would require a multifactorial approach that addresses several biological and social factors that cause these differences.

Leveraging human resources for outbreak analysis: lessons from an international collaboration to support the sub-Saharan African COVID-19 response.

Emerging infectious diseases are a growing threat in sub-Saharan African countries, but the human and technical capacity to quickly respond to outbreaks remains limited. Here, we describe the experience and lessons learned from a joint project with the WHO Regional Office for Africa (WHO AFRO) to support the sub-Saharan African COVID-19 response.In June 2020, WHO AFRO contracted a number of consultants to reinforce the COVID-19 response in member states by providing actionable epidemiological analysis. Given the urgency of the situation and the magnitude of work required, we recruited a worldwide network of field experts, academics and students in the areas of public health, data science and social science to support the effort. Most analyses were performed on a merged line list of COVID-19 cases using a reverse engineering model (line listing built using data extracted from national situation reports shared by countries with the Regional Office for Africa as per the IHR (2005) obligations). The data analysis platform The Renku Project ( https://renkulab.io ) provided secure data storage and permitted collaborative coding.Over a period of 6 months, 63 contributors from 32 nations (including 17 African countries) participated in the project. A total of 45 in-depth country-specific epidemiological reports and data quality reports were prepared for 28 countries. Spatial transmission and mortality risk indices were developed for 23 countries. Text and video-based training modules were developed to integrate and mentor new members. The team also began to develop EpiGraph Hub, a web application that automates the generation of reports similar to those we created, and includes more advanced data analyses features (e.g. mathematical models, geospatial analyses) to deliver real-time, actionable results to decision-makers.Within a short period, we implemented a global collaborative approach to health data management and analyses to advance national responses to health emergencies and outbreaks. The interdisciplinary team, the hands-on training and mentoring, and the participation of local researchers were key to the success of this initiative.