Racial Disparities and Strategies for Improving Equity in Diagnostic Follow-Up for Abnormal Screening Mammograms.

PURPOSE: Black and White women undergo screening mammography at similar rates, but racial disparities in breast cancer outcomes persist. To assess potential contributors, we investigated delays in follow-up after abnormal imaging by race/ethnicity. METHODS: Women who underwent screening mammography at our urban academic center from January 2015 to February 2018 and received a Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System 0 assessment were included. Kaplan-Meier estimates described distributions of time between diagnostic events from (1) screening to diagnostic imaging and (2) diagnostic imaging to biopsy. Multivariable logistic regression models estimated the associations between race/ethnicity and receipt of follow-up within 15 and 30 days. RESULTS: Two thousand five hundred and fifty-four women were included (48.6% non-Hispanic [NH] Black, 38.2% NH White, 13.1% other/unknown). Median time between screening and diagnostic imaging varied by race/ethnicity (White: 7 days [IQR, 2-14]; Black: 12 days [IQR, 7-23]; other/unknown: 9 days [IQR, 5-21]). There were similar disparities in days between diagnostic imaging and biopsy (White: 12 [IQR, 7-24]; Black: 21 [IQR, 13-37]; other/unknown: 16 [IQR, 9-30]) and between screening and biopsy (White: 20 [IQR, 11-41]; Black: 35 [IQR, 22-63]; other/unknown: 27.5 [IQR, 17-42]). After adjustment, odds of diagnostic imaging follow-up within 15 days of screening were lower for Black versus White women (odds ratio, 0.59 [95% CI, 0.44 to 0.80]; P < .001). CONCLUSION: In this diverse cohort, disparities in timely diagnostic follow-up after abnormal breast screening were observed, with Black women waiting 1.75 times as long as White women to obtain a tissue diagnosis. National guidelines for time to diagnostic follow-up may facilitate more timely breast cancer care and potentially affect outcomes.

Racial, Ethnic, and Gender Diversity Among Academic Surgical Leaders in the US.

Importance: Surgical department chairs remain conspicuously nondiverse despite the recognized importance of diverse physician workforces. However, the extent of diversity among non-chair leadership remains underexplored. Objective: To evaluate racial, ethnic, and gender diversity of surgical department chairs, vice chairs (VCs), and division chiefs (DCs) in the US. Design, Setting, and Participants: For this cross-sectional study, publicly accessible medical school and affiliated hospital websites in the US and Puerto Rico were searched from January 15 to July 15, 2022, to collect demographic and leadership data about surgical faculty. Two independent reviewers abstracted demographic data, with up to 2 additional reviewers assisting with coding resolution as necessary. In all, 2165 faculty were included in the analyses. Main Outcomes and Measures: Proportions of racial, ethnic, and gender diversity among chairs, VCs, and DCs in general surgery and 5 surgical specialties (neurosurgery, obstetrics and gynecology, ophthalmology, orthopedics, and otolaryngology). Results: A total of 2165 faculty (1815 males [83.8%] and 350 females [16.2%]; 109 [5.0%] African American or Black individuals; 347 [16.0%] Asian individuals; 83 [3.8%] Hispanic, Latino, or individuals of Spanish origin; and 1624 [75.0%] White individuals as well as 2 individuals [0.1%] of other race or ethnicity) at 154 surgical departments affiliated with 146 medical schools in the US and Puerto Rico were included in the analysis. There were more males than females in leadership positions at all levels-chairs (85.9% vs 14.1%), VCs (68.4% vs 31.6%), and DCs (87.1% vs 12.9%)-and only 192 leaders (8.9%) were from racial or ethnic groups that are underrepresented in medicine (URiM). Females occupied more VC than chair or DC positions both overall (31.6% vs 14.1% and 12.9%, respectively) and within racial and ethnic groups (African American or Black females, 4.0% VC vs 1.5% chair and 0.6% DC positions; P < .001). URiM individuals were most commonly VCs of diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI, 51.6%) or faculty development (17.9%). Vice chairs of faculty development were split equally between males and females, while 64.5% of VCs for DEI were female. All other VCs were predominantly male. Among DC roles, URiM representation was greatest in transplant surgery (13.8%) and lowest in oral and maxillofacial surgery (5.0%). Except for breast and endocrine surgery (63.6% female), females comprised less than 20% of DC roles. Nearly half of DCs (6 of 13 [46.2%]) and VCs (4 of 9 [44.4%]) had no female URiM leaders, and notably, no American Indian, Alaska Native, or Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander individuals were identified in any surgical leadership positions. Conclusions and Relevance: While it is unclear whether promotion from VC to chair or from DC to chair is more likely, these findings of similar gender distribution between chairs and DCs suggest the latter and may partially explain persistent nondiversity among surgical chairs. Female and URiM surgical leaders are disproportionately clustered in roles (eg, VCs of DEI or faculty development) that may not translate into future promotion to department chairs.

Temporal Trends and Factors Associated with Receipt of Post-mastectomy Radiation After Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy in Women with cT3 Breast Cancer.

INTRODUCTION: Given the potential impact of increasingly effective neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) on post-mastectomy radiotherapy (PMRT) recommendations, we examined temporal trends in post-NACT PMRT for cT3 breast cancer. METHODS: We identified women ≥ 18 years in the National Cancer Database (NCDB) diagnosed 2004-2019 with cT3N0-1M0 breast cancer treated with chemotherapy and mastectomy. Multivariable logistic regression and Cox proportional hazards models were used to estimate associations between pathologic NACT response [complete response (CR), partial response (PR), or no response (NR); or disease progression (DP)] and PMRT and between PMRT and overall survival (OS), respectively. RESULTS: We identified 39,901 women (Asian/Pacific Islander 1731, Black 5875, Hispanic 3265, White 27,303). Among cN0 patients with CR, PMRT rates declined from 67% in 2004 to 35% in 2019 but remained unchanged for patients with DP. Relative to NR, CR [odds ratio (OR) 0.36, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.29-0.46] and PR (OR 0.44, 95% CI 0.36-0.55) in cN0 patients were associated with lower odds of PMRT while DP (OR 1.33, 95% CI 1.05-1.69) was associated with higher odds. Among cN1 patients, PMRT rates decreased from 90% to 73% for CR between 2005 and 2019 and increased from 76% to 82% for DP between 2004 and 2019. Relative to NR, CR (OR 0.78, 95% CI 0.63-0.95) was associated with lower odds of PMRT while DP (OR 1.93, 95% CI 1.58-2.37) was associated with higher odds. PMRT was associated with improved OS among cN1 patients (hazard ratio (HR) 0.77, 95% CI 0.67-0.88). CONCLUSION: CR was associated with decreased PMRT receipt over time, while temporal trends following PR and DP differed by cN status, suggesting that nodal involvement guided PMRT receipt more than in-breast disease.