Evaluating Equity Through the Social Determinants of Hearing Health.

Hearing loss in adults is a significant public health problem throughout the world. Undiagnosed and untreated hearing loss causes a measurable impact on health and social, occupational, and emotional well-being of those affected. In spite of a wide array of health care resources to identify and manage hearing loss, there exist vast disparities in outcomes, as well as access to and utilization of hearing healthcare. Hearing rehabilitation outcomes may vary widely among different populations and there is a pressing need to understand, in a broader sense, the factors that influence equitable outcomes, access, and utilization. These factors can be categorized according to the widely accepted framework of social determinants of health, which is defined by the World Health Organization as "the conditions in which people are born, grow, work, live, and age." According to Healthy People 2030, these determinants can be broken into the following domains: healthcare access and quality, education access and quality, social and community context, economic stability, and neighborhood and built environment. This article defines these domains and examines the published research and the gaps in research of each of these domains, as it pertains to hearing health and healthcare. Herein, we review foundational sources on the social determinants of health and hearing-related research focused on the topic. Further consideration is given to how these factors can be evaluated in a systematic fashion and be incorporated into translational research and hearing health care.

Factors Predicting Participation in the Prospective Genomic Sequencing Study, Total Cancer Care (TCC), in Kentucky.

PURPOSE: Large-scale genomic sequencing studies are driving oncology drug development. However, rural populations, like those residing in Appalachian Kentucky, are underrepresented in these efforts. In this study, we determined the frequency of participation, reasons for nonparticipation, and factors predicting the decision to participate in the Total Cancer Care (TCC) prospective genomic cohort study. METHODS: A total of 1,188 patients were invited to enroll in the TCC prospective cohort from December 2018 to May 2019. Declining patients were queried for their rationale for nonparticipation and their patient data were obtained from the Kentucky Cancer Registry (KCR). Logistic regression was used to assess the association between characteristics and study participation. The association of study participation with survival was modeled with Cox proportional-hazards regression. RESULTS: 90.9% (1,081) patients consented to participate. In multivariate analysis, factors significantly associated with participation were age, gender, treatment status, and race. Though overall more women participated in the study, men were more likely to participate than women when invited (OR 1.57). Younger, Caucasian individuals who had received chemotherapy, but not surgery, were also more likely to participate. Patients in the Kentucky Appalachian cohort were primarily rural, had less educational attainment, and lower socioeconomic status. Kentucky Appalachian patients were no less likely to enroll in TCC than non-Appalachian patients. Consented individuals had higher overall survival compared to those who declined. CONCLUSION: Though minorities, those with low socioeconomic status, and rural populations are underrepresented in genomic studies, they were no less likely to participate when given the opportunity, and participation was associated with better clinical outcomes.

Implementation and Clinical Utility of an Integrated Academic-Community Regional Molecular Tumor Board.

PURPOSE: Precision oncology develops and implements evidence-based personalized therapies that are based on specific genetic targets within each tumor. However, a major challenge that remains is the provision of a standardized, up-to-date, and evidenced-based precision medicine initiative across a geographic region. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We developed a statewide molecular tumor board that integrates academic and community oncology practices. The Precision Medicine Molecular Tumor Board (PMMTB) has three components: a biweekly Web-based teleconference tumor board meeting provided as a free clinical service, an observational research registry, and a monthly journal club to establish and revise evidence-based guidelines for off-label therapies. The PMMTB allows for flexible and rapid implementation of treatment, uniformity in practice, and the ability to track outcomes. RESULTS: We describe the implementation of the PMMTB and its first year of activity. Seventy-seven patient cases were presented, 48 were enrolled in a registry, and 38 had recommendations and clinical follow-up. The 38 subjects had diverse solid tumors (lung, 45%; GI, 21%; breast, 13%; other, 21%). Of these subjects, targeted therapy was recommended for 32 (84%). Clinical trials were identified for 24 subjects (63%), and nontrial targeted medicines for 16 (42%). Nine subjects (28%) received recommended therapy with a response rate of 17% (one of six) and a clinical benefit rate (partial response + stable disease) of 38% (three of eight). Although clinical trials often were identified, patients rarely enrolled. CONCLUSION: The PMMTB provides a model for a regional molecular tumor board with clinical utility. This work highlights the need for outcome registries and improved access to clinical trials to pragmatically implement precision oncology.