Rural-Urban Disparities in Receipt of Surgery for Potentially Resectable Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer.

INTRODUCTION: Access to cancer care, especially surgery, is limited in rural areas. However, the specific reasons rural patient populations do not receive surgery for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is unknown. We investigated geographic disparities in reasons for failure to receive guideline-indicated surgical treatment for patients with potentially resectable NSCLC. METHODS: The National Cancer Database was used to identify patients with clinical stage I-IIIA (N0-N1) NSCLC between 2004 and 2018. Patients from rural areas were compared to urban areas, and the reason for nonreceipt of surgery was evaluated. Adjusted odds of (1) primary nonsurgical management, (2) surgery being deemed contraindicated due to risk, (3) surgery being recommended but not performed, and (4) overall failure to receive surgery were determined. RESULTS: The study included 324,785 patients with NSCLC with 42,361 (13.0%) from rural areas. Overall, 62.4% of patients from urban areas and 58.8% of patients from rural areas underwent surgery (P < 0.001). Patients from rural areas had increased odds of (1) being recommended primary nonsurgical management (adjusted odds ratio [aOR]: 1.14, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.05-1.23), (2) surgery being deemed contraindicated due to risk (aOR: 1.19, 95% CI: 1.07-1.33), (3) surgery being recommended but not performed (aOR: 1.13, 95% CI: 1.01-1.26), and (4) overall failure to receive surgery (aOR: 1.21, 95% CI: 1.13-1.29; all P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: There are geographic disparities in the management of NSCLC. Rural patient populations are more likely to fail to undergo surgery for potentially resectable disease for every reason examined.

Protection-adjusted UV dose estimated for body areas: Daily self-reported sun protection modification of wearable UV sensor dose.

BACKGROUND: During the last 20 years, 50% of adults with sun-sensitive skin have sunburned annually. Reducing the proportion of people who sunburn requires understanding the circumstances and outdoor activities during which at-risk people sunburn. METHODS: A 7-day observational study of melanoma survivors (n = 20) and young adult first-degree relatives of melanoma survivors (FDRs) (n = 20) captured daily UV exposure, sun protection, and sunburns during spring and summer in the Midwest of the United States (latitude 41.8°N). Participants wore UV and physical activity sensors and completed a daily self-reported survey of sun protection, sunburn, and physical activities. The estimated protection-adjusted UV dose was calculated for each body area by integrating self-reported sun protection with UV sensor dose. RESULTS: In 254 days, at least one body area in 9 of 20 (45%) melanoma survivors and 11 of 20 (55%) FDRs was sunburned (erythema at 24 hours). Sunburns were associated with spring and walking for transportation or leisure, especially walking the dog. Melanoma survivors used sunscreen daily on the face; however, forearms and lower legs were not protected during walking. Young adults did not use sun protection on the face, forearms or lower legs during walking for transportation and use was ineffective during sports. CONCLUSION: The sun protection patterns of daily living identified in this study may promote recognition of erythema as sunburn and inform the development of tailored sun protection mobile applications promoting self-monitoring with wearable UV sensors.

Sun exposure reduction by melanoma survivors with wearable sensor providing real-time UV exposure and daily text messages with structured goal setting.

Despite knowledge of subsequent melanoma risk and the benefit of sun protection in risk reduction, melanoma survivors often do not engage in adequate sun protection and continue to sunburn at rates similar to individuals without a history of skin cancer. This novel intensive intervention provided a wearable UV sensor delivering real-time UV exposure with a smartphone and daily text messages. On days 1-10 (period 1), behavioral facilitation and outcome expectancies messages were provided. On day 10, participants reviewed and reflected on their daily UV exposure on the previous 10 days and set goals for improving sun protection. Then on days 11-21 (period 2) self-efficacy and self-regulation messages were provided. Sixty melanoma survivors were randomized (1:1) to receive structured or unstructured goal setting queries on day 10. Controlling for cloudy/rain conditions with less UV due to weather, there was a time effect with a significant decrease in UV exposure from periods 1-2 [period 1-2, F (59) = 22.60, p < 0.0001]. In this short-term study, melanoma survivors managed their daily UV exposure to stay below their maximum tolerated UV dose. ClinicalTrials.gov Protocol Record NCT0334796, date of registration Nov 15, 2017.