Racial Disparities in Head and Neck Cancer: It's Not Just About Access.

OBJECTIVE: Medical literature identifies stark racial disparities in head and neck cancer (HNC) in the United States, primarily between non-Hispanic white (NHW) and non-Hispanic black (NHB) populations. The etiology of this disparity is often attributed to inequitable access to health care and socioeconomic status (SES). However, other contributors have been reported. We performed a systematic review to better understand the multifactorial landscape driving racial disparities in HNC. DATA SOURCES: A systematic review was conducted in Covidence following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses Guidelines. A search of PubMed, SCOPUS, and CINAHL for literature published through November 2022 evaluating racial disparities in HNC identified 2309 publications. REVIEW METHODS: Full texts were screened by 2 authors independently, and inconsistencies were resolved by consensus. Three hundred forty publications were ultimately selected and categorized into themes including disparities in access/SES, treatment, lifestyle, and biology. Racial groups examined included NHB and NHW patients but also included Hispanic, Native American, and Asian/Pacific Islander patients to a lesser extent. RESULTS: Of the 340 articles, 192 focused on themes of access/SES, including access to high-quality hospitals, insurance coverage, and transportation contributing to disparate HNC outcomes. Additional themes discussed in 148 articles included incongruities in surgical recommendations, tobacco/alcohol use, human papillomavirus-associated malignancies, and race-informed silencing of tumor suppressor genes. CONCLUSION: Differential access to care plays a significant role in racial disparities in HNC, disproportionately affecting NHB populations. However, there are other significant themes driving racial disparities. Future studies should focus on providing equitable access to care while also addressing these additional sources of disparities in HNC.

Timing of postoperative radiation therapy for major salivary gland cancers.

BACKGROUND: The impact of timing of PORT initiation for major salivary gland cancers on survival is unknown. We aim to examine the impact of PORT timeliness on overall survival (OS) of patients with major salivary gland cancers. METHODS: This was a cross-sectional analysis using data from the National Cancer Database (2004-2017) and included patients with major salivary gland cancer treated with surgery and PORT. RESULTS: In total, 5701 patients were included (3133 [55%] male, 4644 [82%] white, mean age 59 ± 16 years). For the overall cohort, PORT >6 weeks was not associated with decreased OS (1.00 aHR, 95% CI 0.89-1.11). When specifically examining patients with mucoepidermoid carcinoma, PORT >6 weeks was associated with a decreased OS (1.27 aHR, 95% CI 1.01-1.58). CONCLUSIONS: Overall, this analysis did not demonstrate a survival benefit for initiating PORT within 6 weeks for patients with salivary gland malignancies. Subset analysis did support initiating PORT within 6 weeks after resection for patients with mucoepidermoid carcinomas. This was not demonstrated in other major salivary gland cancer histologies.