Racial and socioeconomic disparities in survival among women with advanced-stage ovarian cancer who received systemic therapy.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to assess the association between race/ethnicity and all-cause mortality among women with advanced-stage ovarian cancer who received systemic therapy. METHODS: We analyzed data from the National Cancer Database on women diagnosed with advanced-stage ovarian cancer from 2004 to 2015 who received systemic therapy. Race/ethnicity was categorized as Non-Hispanic (NH) White, NH-Black, Hispanic, NH-Asian/Pacific Islander, and Other. Income and education were combined to form a composite measure of socioeconomic status (SES) and categorized into low-, mid-, and high-SES. Multivariable Cox proportional hazards models were used to assess whether race/ethnicity was associated with the risk of death after adjusting for sociodemographic, clinical, and treatment factors. Additionally, subgroup analyses were conducted by SES, age, and surgery receipt. RESULTS: The study population comprised 53,367 women (52.4% ages ≥ 65 years, 82% NH-White, 8.7% NH-Black, 5.7% Hispanic, and 2.7% NH-Asian/Pacific Islander) in the analysis. After adjusting for covariates, the NH-Black race was associated with a higher risk of death versus NH-White race (aHR: 1.12; 95% CI: 1.07,1.18), while Hispanic ethnicity was associated with a lower risk of death compared to NH-White women (aHR: 0.87; 95% CI: 0.80, 0.95). Furthermore, NH-Black women versus NH-White women had an increased risk of mortality among those with low-SES characteristics (aHR:1.12; 95% CI:1.03-1.22) and mid-SES groups (aHR: 1.13; 95% CI:1.05-1.21). CONCLUSIONS: Among women with advanced-stage ovarian cancer who received systemic therapy, NH-Black women experienced poorer survival compared to NH-White women. Future studies should be directed to identify drivers of ovarian cancer disparities, particularly racial differences in treatment response and surveillance.

Persistent poverty disparities in incidence and outcomes among oral and pharynx cancer patients.

PURPOSE: Disparities in oral cavity and pharyngeal cancer based on race/ethnicity and socioeconomic status have been reported, but the impact of living within areas that are persistently poor at the time of diagnosis and outcome is unknown. This study aimed to investigate whether the incidence, 5-year relative survival, stage at diagnosis, and mortality among patients with oral cavity and pharyngeal cancers varied by persistent poverty. METHODS: Data were drawn from the SEER database (2006-2017) and included individuals diagnosed with oral cavity and pharyngeal cancers. Persistent poverty (at census tract) is defined as areas where ≥ 20% of the population has lived below the poverty level for ~ 30 years. Age-adjusted incidence and 5-year survival rates were calculated. Multivariable logistic regression was used to estimate the association between persistent poverty and advanced stage cancer. Cumulative incidence and multivariable subdistribution hazard models were used to evaluate mortality risk. In addition, results were stratified by cancer primary site, sex, race/ethnicity, and rurality. RESULTS: Of the 90,631 patients included in the analysis (61.7% < 65 years old, 71.6% males), 8.8% lived in persistent poverty. Compared to non-persistent poverty, patients in persistent poverty had higher incidence and lower 5-year survival rates. Throughout 10 years, the cumulative incidence of cancer death was greater in patients from persistent poverty and were more likely to present with advanced-stage cancer and higher mortality risk. In the stratified analysis by primary site, patients in persistent poverty with oropharyngeal, oral cavity, and nasopharyngeal cancers had an increased risk of mortality compared to the patients in non-persistent poverty. CONCLUSION: This study found an association between oral cavity and pharyngeal cancer outcomes among patients in persistent poverty indicating a multidimensional strategy to improve survival.

Frailty in patients with ovarian cancer and the role of healthcare access, race, and ethnicity.

OBJECTIVE: Ovarian cancer has poor 5-year survival, particularly among non-Hispanic (NH) Black patients. Efforts to identify patients at high-risk of functional limitations and frailty may improve outcomes. In this study, we examined how healthcare access (HCA) and race/ethnicity relate to frailty among patients with ovarian cancer. METHODS: We identified Hispanic, NH Black, and NH White patients diagnosed at ages ≥6 5 years with ovarian cancer between 2009 and 2015 using SEER-Medicare. Log-binomial regression was used to estimate prevalence ratios (PRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for the association between HCA and race/ethnicity with pre- or post-diagnosis frailty, adjusting for age and comorbidities. RESULTS: A total of 6041 patients with ovarian cancer were included, including 91.8% NH White, 6.6% NH Black, and 1.7% Hispanic. Pre-diagnosis, 14.7% of patients were defined as frail (NH White: 14.3%; NH Black: 17.9%; Hispanic: 20.8%). Post-diagnosis, frailty prevalence increased to 58.8% (NH White: 58.2%; NH Black: 65.2%; Hispanic: 70.2%). No statistically significant associations were observed between race/ethnicity and pre- or post-diagnosis frailty in fully adjusted models. After adjustment for patient characteristics and healthcare accessibility and availability, higher healthcare affordability was associated with a decreased prevalence of pre-diagnosis frailty (PR: 0.91, 95% CI: 0.8 5, 0.98). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with ovarian cancer have a high prevalence of frailty after diagnosis, particularly NH Black and Hispanic patients. Improving healthcare affordability may prevent or help manage frailty in Medicare patients, improve receipt of cancer treatment, and increase cancer survival.

Diversity and transparency in gynecologic oncology clinical trials.

PURPOSE: Clinical trials advance the standard of care for patients. Patients enrolled in trials should represent the population who would benefit from the intervention in clinical practice. The aim of this study was to assess whether clinical trials enrolling patients with gynecologic cancers report racial and ethnic participant composition and to examine the level of diversity in clinical trials. METHODS: Using ClinicalTrials.gov, we identified clinical trials enrolling patients with ovarian, uterine/endometrial, cervical, vaginal, and vulvar cancers from 1988 to 2019. Race and ethnicity data were extracted from participant demographics. Descriptive statistics on race, ethnicity, cancer type, location, study status, and sponsor type were calculated. Among trials which reported race and/or ethnicity, sub-analyses were performed on composition of race and ethnicity by funding source, location, and completed study status. RESULTS: A total of 1,882 trials met inclusion criteria; only 179 trials (9.5%) reported race information. Of these, the racial distribution of enrollees was 66.9% White, 8.6% Asian, 8.5% Black/African American, 0.4% Indian/Alaskan Native, 0.1% Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander, 1.0% more than one race, and 14.5% unknown. Only 100 (5.3%) trials reported ethnicity. Except for trials enrolling patients with cervical cancer which enrolled 65.2% White and 62.1% Non-Hispanic/Latino/a patients, enrollees in trials for other gynecologic cancers were over 80% White and 88% Non-Hispanic/Latino/a. Industry funded trials enrolled higher proportions of White (68.4%) participants than non-industry funded trials (57.5%). Domestic trials report race (11.5%) and ethnicity (7.6%) at higher rates than international trials (6.9% and 2.3%, respectively). Reporting of race (1.7% vs. 13.9%) and ethnicity (1.7% vs. 11.1%) has increased over time for patients enrolled in 2000 vs. 2018. CONCLUSION: Less than 10% of trials enrolling patients with gynecologic malignancies report racial/ethnic participant composition on ClinicalTrials.gov. Accurate reporting of participant race/ethnicity is imperative to ensuring minority representation in clinical trials.

Association of reproductive risk factors and breast cancer molecular subtypes: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Associations between reproductive factors and breast cancer (BC) risk vary by molecular subtype (i.e., luminal A, luminal B, HER2, and triple negative/basal-like [TNBC]). In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we summarized the associations between reproductive factors and BC subtypes. METHODS: Studies from 2000 to 2021 were included if BC subtype was examined in relation to one of 11 reproductive risk factors: age at menarche, age at menopause, age at first birth, menopausal status, parity, breastfeeding, oral contraceptive (OC) use, hormone replacement therapy (HRT), pregnancy, years since last birth and abortion. For each reproductive risk factor, BC subtype, and study design (case-control/cohort or case-case), random-effects models were used to estimate pooled relative risks and 95% confidence intervals. RESULTS: A total of 75 studies met the inclusion criteria for systematic review. Among the case-control/cohort studies, later age at menarche and breastfeeding were consistently associated with decreased risk of BC across all subtypes, while later age at menopause, later age of first childbirth, and nulliparity/low parity were associated with increased risk of luminal A, luminal B, and HER2 subtypes. In the case-only analysis, compared to luminal A, postmenopausal status increased the risk of HER2 and TNBC. Associations were less consistent across subtypes for OC and HRT use. CONCLUSION: Identifying common risk factors across BC subtypes can enhance the tailoring of prevention strategies, and risk stratification models can benefit from subtype specificity. Adding breastfeeding status to current BC risk prediction models can enhance predictive ability, given the consistency of the associations across subtypes.

Shiftwork, long working hours and markers of inflammation in a national US population-based sample of employed black and white men and women aged ≥45 years.

OBJECTIVES: Work schedule demands contribute to circadian disruption and may influence health via an inflammatory response. We examined the impact of shiftwork and long work hours on inflammation in a national US sample. METHODS: Participants included 12 487 employed black and white men and women aged ≥45 years enrolled in the REasons for Geographic and Racial Differences in Stroke Study who completed an occupational questionnaire (2011-2013) and clinical examination (2013-2016). Cross-sectional associations between shiftwork and work hours with log-transformed high-sensitivity C reactive protein (CRP) and white blood cell (WBC) count were examined by multiple linear regression analysis, overall and by race-sex subgroups. RESULTS: Overall, rotating shift workers had higher log-CRP concentration compared with day workers (ß=0.09, 95% CI:0.02 to 0.16) and findings for WBC were null. Black women had the highest geometric mean CRP (2.82 mg/L), while white men had the highest WBC (6.35×109/L). White men who worked afternoons had higher log-CRP compared with those who worked days (ß=0.20, 95% CI: 0.08 to 0.33). Black men engaged in shiftwork <10 years working ≥55 hours/week had higher log-CRP and log-WBC compared with those working days <55 hours/week (ß=0.33, 95% CI: 0.02 to 0.64 and ß=0.10, 95% CI: 0.003 to 0.19). Among shift workers, non-retired white women working forward and backward shift rotations had higher log-CRP compared with those working forward only (ß=0.49, 95% CI: 0.02 to 0.96). CONCLUSIONS: Shift workers had higher inflammatory markers compared with day workers and race-sex disparities should be examined further. These findings highlight a potential biological pathway linking work schedule demands and chronic disease.

Social determinants of health and cancer mortality in the Reasons for Geographic and Racial Differences in Stroke (REGARDS) cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Social determinants of health (SDOHs) cluster together and can have deleterious impacts on health outcomes. Individually, SDOHs increase the risk of cancer mortality, but their cumulative burden is not well understood. The authors sought to determine the combined effect of SDOH on cancer mortality. METHODS: Using the Reasons for Geographic and Racial Differences in Stroke (REGARDS) cohort, the authors studied 29,766 participants aged 45+ years and followed them 10+ years. Eight potential SDOHs were considered, and retained SDOHs that were associated with cancer mortality (P < .10) were retained to create a count (0, 1, 2, 3+). Cox proportional hazard models estimated associations between the SDOH count and cancer mortality through December 31, 2017, adjusting for confounders. Models were age-stratified (45-64 vs 65+ years). RESULTS: Participants were followed for a median of 10.6 years (interquartile range [IQR], 6.5, 12.7 years). Low education, low income, zip code poverty, poor public health infrastructure, lack of health insurance, and social isolation were significantly associated with cancer mortality. In adjusted models, among those <65 years, compared to no SDOHs, having 1 SDOH (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 1.39; 95% CI, 1.11-1.75), 2 SDOHs (aHR, 1.61; 95% CI, 1.26-2.07), and 3+ SDOHs (aHR, 2.09; 95% CI, 1.58-2.75) were associated with cancer mortality (P for trend <.0001). Among individuals 65+ years, compared to no SDOH, having 1 SDOH (aHR, 1.16; 95% CI, 1.00-1.35) and 3+ SDOHs (aHR, 1.26; 95% CI, 1.04-1.52) was associated with cancer mortality (P for trend = .032). CONCLUSIONS: A greater number of SDOHs were significantly associated with an increased risk of cancer mortality, which persisted after adjustment for confounders.

Association of area-level socioeconomic status and non-small cell lung cancer stage by race/ethnicity and health care-level factors: Analysis of the National Cancer Database.

BACKGROUND: This study examined whether the association of socioeconomic status (SES) and non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) stage varied by race/ethnicity and health care access measures. METHODS: This study used data from the 2004-2016 National Cancer Database for patients aged 18-89 years who had been diagnosed with Stage 0-IV NSCLC. Adjusted odds ratios (aORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated for the associations of area-level SES with an advanced stage at diagnosis via multilevel, multivariable logistic regression. The stage at diagnosis was dichotomized into early (0-II) and advanced (III-IV) stages, and area-level SES was categorized on the basis of the patient's zip code level: (1) the proportion of adults aged ≥25 years without a high school degree and (2) the median household income. The models were stratified by race/ethnicity (non-Hispanic [NH] White, NH Black, Hispanic, Asian, American Indian/Alaskan Native, and Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander), insurance status (none, government, and private), and health care facility type (community, comprehensive community, academic/research, and integrated network). RESULTS: The study population included 1,329,972 patients. Although only 17% of the NH White patients were in the lowest income quartile, 50% of the NH Black patients were in this group. Lower area-level education and income were associated with higher odds of an advanced-stage diagnosis (aOR for education, 1.12; 95% CI, 1.10-1.13; aOR for income, 1.13; 95% CI, 1.11-1.14). These associations persisted among NH White, NH Black, Hispanic, and Asian patients; among those with government and private insurance (but not the uninsured); and among those treated at each facility type. CONCLUSIONS: Area-level income and education are strongly associated with an advanced NSCLC diagnosis regardless of the facility type and among those with government and private insurance.

Healthcare Access Dimensions and Guideline-Concordant Ovarian Cancer Treatment: SEER-Medicare Analysis of the ORCHiD Study.

BACKGROUND: Racial disparities exist in receipt of guideline-concordant treatment of ovarian cancer (OC). However, few studies have evaluated how various dimensions of healthcare access (HCA) contribute to these disparities. METHODS: We analyzed data from non-Hispanic (NH)-Black, Hispanic, and NH-White patients with OC diagnosed in 2008 to 2015 from the SEER-Medicare database and defined HCA dimensions as affordability, availability, and accessibility, measured as aggregate scores created with factor analysis. Receipt of guideline-concordant OC surgery and chemotherapy was defined based on the NCCN Guidelines for Ovarian Cancer. Multivariable-adjusted modified Poisson regression models were used to assess the relative risk (RR) for guideline-concordant treatment in relation to HCA. RESULTS: The study cohort included 5,632 patients: 6% NH-Black, 6% Hispanic, and 88% NH-White. Only 23.8% of NH-White patients received guideline-concordant surgery and the full cycles of chemotherapy versus 14.2% of NH-Black patients. Higher affordability (RR, 1.05; 95% CI, 1.01-1.08) and availability (RR, 1.06; 95% CI, 1.02-1.10) were associated with receipt of guideline-concordant surgery, whereas higher affordability was associated with initiation of systemic therapy (hazard ratio, 1.09; 95% CI, 1.05-1.13). After adjusting for all 3 HCA scores and demographic and clinical characteristics, NH-Black patients remained less likely than NH-White patients to initiate systemic therapy (hazard ratio, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.75-0.99). CONCLUSIONS: Multiple HCA dimensions predict receipt of guideline-concordant treatment but do not fully explain racial disparities among patients with OC. Acceptability and accommodation are 2 additional HCA dimensions which may be critical to addressing these disparities.