Hypertensive Disorders of Pregnancy: Common Clinical Conundrums.

Importance: Hypertensive complications of pregnancy comprise 16% of maternal deaths in developed countries and 7.4% of deaths in the United States. Rates of preeclampsia increased 25% from 1987 to 2004, and rates of severe preeclampsia have increased 6.7-fold between 1980 and 2003. Objective: The aim of this study was to review current and available evidence for common clinical questions regarding the management of hypertensive disorders of pregnancy. Evidence Acquisition: Original research articles, review articles, and guidelines on hypertension in pregnancy were reviewed. Results: Severe gestational hypertension should be managed as preeclampsia with severe features. Serum uric acid levels can be useful in predicting development of superimposed preeclampsia for women with chronic hypertension. When presenting with preeclampsia with severe features before 34 weeks, expectant management should be considered only when both maternal and fetal conditions are stable. In the setting of hypertensive disorders of pregnancy, oral antihypertensive medications should be initiated when systolic blood pressure is greater than 160 mm Hg or when diastolic blood pressure is greater than 110 mm Hg, with the most ideal agents being labetalol or nifedipine. Furthermore, although risk of preeclampsia recurrence in future pregnancy is low, women with a history of preeclampsia should be managed with 81 mg aspirin daily for preeclampsia prevention. Conclusions and Relevance: Despite the frequency with which hypertensive disorders of pregnancy are encountered clinically, situations arise frequently with limited evidence to guide providers in their management. An urgent need exists to better understand this disease to optimize outcomes for impacted patients.

Racial and ethnic disparities among donor oocyte banks in the United States.

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether racial and ethnic distributions of oocyte donors contributing to US oocyte banks differ from the demographics of US women and donor oocyte recipients. DESIGN: Cross-sectional study. SETTING: United States donor oocyte banks, US census, and fertility clinics reporting to the Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology Clinic Outcome Reporting System. PATIENTS: Oocyte donors from 12 banks, women aged 18-44 years based on the 2019 census, and US recipients of cryopreserved donor oocytes from 2012 to 2015. INTERVENTION: None. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Proportions of donors identifying as each racial and ethnic group. RESULTS: Of the 1,574 oocyte donors, 678 (43.1%) identified as white compared with 54.8% of US women and 69.1% of donor oocyte recipients. Proportions of donors identifying as Hispanic or two or more races were larger than those of US women and donor oocyte recipients (Hispanic: 24.1% vs. 20.8%, and 24.1% vs. 8.8%, respectively; two or more races: 16.1% vs. 2.3%, and 16.1% vs. 0.5%, respectively). African American donors were underrepresented compared with US women (8.9% vs. 14.0%) and oocyte recipients (8.9% vs. 10.8%). Although the proportion of Asian donors was similar to that of US women (7.7% vs. 7.1%), Asian donors were underrepresented compared with donor oocyte recipients (7.7% vs. 10.6%). CONCLUSION: Racial and ethnic distribution of oocyte donors differs significantly from the demographics of US women and cryopreserved donor oocyte recipients. These data suggest a need for targeted recruitment of African American and Asian oocyte donors.

Race, Affordability and Utilization of Supportive Care in Ovarian Cancer Patients.

OBJECTIVE: Lack of access to supportive care (SC) among cancer patients have been well documented. However, the role of affordability in this disparity among ovarian cancer (OC) patients remain poorly understood. METHODS: Patients with OC between 2008 and 2015 were identified from the SEER-Medicare dataset. Racial disparities in utilization of SC medications within the six months of OC diagnosis among patients with Medicare Part D coverage was examined. Multivariable log-binomial regression models were used to examine the associations of race, affordability and SC medications after adjusting for clinical covariates among all patients and separately among patients with advanced-stage disease. RESULTS: The study cohort included 3697 patients: 86% non-Hispanic White (NHW), 6% non-Hispanic Black (NHB), and 8% Hispanic. In adjusted models, NHB and Hispanic patients were less likely to receive antidepressants compared to NHW patients (NHB: aOR 0.46; 95% CI 0.33-0.63 and Hispanic: aOR 0.79; 95% CI 0.63-0.99). This association persisted for NHB patients with advanced-stage disease (aOR 0.42; 95% CI 0.28-0.62). Patients dual enrolled in Medicaid were more likely to receive antidepressants (overall: aOR 1.34; 95% CI 1.17-1.53 and advanced-stage: aOR 1.29; 95% CI 1.10-1.52). However, patients residing in areas with higher vs. lower proportions of lower educated adults (overall: aOR 0.82; 95% CI 0.70-0.97 and advanced-stage: aOR 0.82; 95% CI 0.68-0.99) were less likely to receive antidepressants. CONCLUSION: Black OC patients and those living in lower educated areas were less likely to receive antidepressants as SC. Given the importance of post-primary treatment quality of life for cancer patients, interventions are needed to enhance equitable access to SC.

Ovarian Cancer Epidemiology, Healthcare Access and Disparities (ORCHiD): methodology for a population-based study of black, Hispanic and white patients with ovarian cancer.

INTRODUCTION: Less than 40% of patients with ovarian cancer (OC) in the USA receive stage-appropriate guideline-adherent surgery and chemotherapy. Black patients with cancer report greater depression, pain and fatigue than white patients. Lack of access to healthcare likely contributes to low treatment rates and racial differences in outcomes. The Ovarian Cancer Epidemiology, Healthcare Access and Disparities study aims to characterise healthcare access (HCA) across five specific dimensions-Availability, Affordability, Accessibility, Accommodation and Acceptability-among black, Hispanic and white patients with OC, evaluate the impact of HCA on quality of treatment, supportive care and survival, and explore biological mechanisms that may contribute to OC disparities. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We will use the Surveillance Epidemiology and Ends Results dataset linked with Medicare claims data from 9744 patients with OC ages 65 years and older. We will recruit 1641 patients with OC (413 black, 299 Hispanic and 929 white) from cancer registries in nine US states. We will examine HCA dimensions in relation to three main outcomes: (1) receipt of quality, guideline adherent initial treatment and supportive care, (2) quality of life based on patient-reported outcomes and (3) survival. We will obtain saliva and vaginal microbiome samples to examine prognostic biomarkers. We will use hierarchical regression models to estimate the impact of HCA dimensions across patient, neighbourhood, provider and hospital levels, with random effects to account for clustering. Multilevel structural equation models will estimate the total, direct and indirect effects of race on treatment mediated through HCA dimensions. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Result dissemination will occur through presentations at national meetings and in collaboration with collaborators, community partners and colleagues across othercancer centres. We will disclose findings to key stakeholders, including scientists, providers and community members. This study has been approved by the Duke Institutional Review Board (Pro00101872). Safety considerations include protection of patient privacy. All disseminated data will be deidentified and summarised.