Rural comprehensive cancer care: Qualitative analysis of current challenges and opportunities.

PURPOSE: While limited resources can make high-quality, comprehensive, coordinated cancer care provision challenging in rural settings, rural cancer patients often rely on local hospitals for care. To develop resources and strategies to support high-quality local cancer care, it is critical to understand the current experiences of rural cancer care physicians, including perceived strengths and challenges of providing cancer care in rural areas.  METHODS: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 13 cancer providers associated with all 12 non-metropolitan/rural Iowa hospitals that diagnose or treat >100 cancer patients annually. Iterative thematic analysis was conducted to develop domains. FINDINGS: Participants identified geographic proximity and sense of community as strengths of local care. They described decision-making processes and challenges related to referring patients to larger centers for complex procedures, including a lack of dedicated navigators to facilitate and track transfers between institutions and occasional lack of respect from academic physicians. Participants reported a desire for strengthening collaborations with larger urban/academic cancer centers, including access to educational opportunities, shared resources and strategies to collect and monitor data on quality, and clinical trials. CONCLUSIONS: Rural cancer care providers are dedicated to providing high-quality care close to home for their patients and would welcome opportunities to increase collaboration with larger centers to improve coordination and comprehensiveness of care, collect and monitor data on quality of care, and access continuing education opportunities. Further research is needed to develop implementation approaches that will extend resources, services, and expertise to rural providers to facilitate high-quality cancer care for all cancer patients.

Identifying predictors of COVID-related delays in cancer-specific medical care.

PURPOSE: Evidence of the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on cancer prevention and control is growing, but little is known about patient-level factors associated with delayed care. We analyzed data from a survey focused on Iowan cancer patients' COVID-19 experiences in the early part of the pandemic. METHODS: Participants were recruited from the University of Iowa Holden Comprehensive Cancer Center's Patients Enhancing Research Collaborations at Holden (PERCH) program. We surveyed respondents on demographic characteristics, COVID-19 experiences and reactions, and delays in any cancer-related health care appointment, or cancer-related treatment appointments. Two-sided significance tests assessed differences in COVID-19 experiences and reactions between those who experienced delays and those who did not. RESULTS: There were 780 respondents (26% response), with breast, prostate, kidney, skin, and colorectal cancers representing the majority of respondents. Delays in cancer care were reported by 29% of respondents. In multivariable-adjusted models, rural residents (OR 1.47; 95% CI 1.03, 2.11) and those experiencing feelings of isolation (OR 2.18; 95% CI 1.37, 3.47) were more likely to report any delay, where experiencing financial difficulties predicted delays in treatment appointments (OR 5.72; 95% CI 1.96, 16.67). Health insurance coverage and concern about the pandemic were not statistically significantly associated with delays. CONCLUSION: These findings may inform cancer care delivery during periods of instability when treatment may be disrupted by informing clinicians about concerns that patients have during the treatment process. Future research should assess whether delays in cancer care impact long-term cancer outcomes and whether delays exacerbate existing disparities in cancer outcomes.

Guideline-concordant breast cancer care by patient race and ethnicity accounting for individual-, facility- and area-level characteristics: a SEER-Medicare study.

PURPOSE: To examine racial-ethnic variation in adherence to established quality metrics (NCCN guidelines and ASCO quality metrics) for breast cancer, accounting for individual-, facility-, and area-level factors. METHODS: Data from women diagnosed with invasive breast cancer at 66+ years of age from 2000 to 2017 were examined using SEER-Medicare. Associations between race and ethnicity and guideline-concordant diagnostics, locoregional treatment, systemic therapy, documented stage, and oncologist encounters were estimated using multilevel logistic regression models to account for clustering within facilities or counties. RESULTS: Black and American Indian/Alaska Native (AIAN) women had consistently lower odds of guideline-recommended care than non-Hispanic White (NHW) women (Diagnostic workup: ORBlack 0.83 (0.79-0.88), ORAIAN 0.66 (0.54-0.81); known stage: ORBlack 0.87 (0.80-0.94), ORAIAN 0.63 (0.47-0.85); seeing an oncologist: ORBlack 0.75 (0.71-0.79), ORAIAN 0.60 (0.47-0.72); locoregional treatment: ORBlack 0.80 (0.76-0.84), ORAIAN 0.84 (0.68-1.02); systemic therapies: ORBlack 0.90 (0.83-0.98), ORAIAN 0.66 (0.48-0.91)). Commission on Cancer accreditation and facility volume were significantly associated with higher odds of guideline-concordant diagnostics, stage, oncologist visits, and systemic therapy. Black residential segregation was associated with significantly lower odds of guideline-concordant locoregional treatment and systemic therapy. Rurality and area SES were associated with significantly lower odds of guideline-concordant diagnostics and oncologist visits. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first study to examine guideline-concordance across the continuum of breast cancer care from diagnosis to treatment initiation. Disparities were present from the diagnostic phase and persisted throughout the clinical course. Facility and area characteristics may facilitate or pose barriers to guideline-adherent treatment and warrant future investigation as mediators of racial-ethnic disparities in breast cancer care.

Perspectives on Referring for Rectal Cancer Surgery: a Survey Study of Gastroenterologist and General Surgeons in Iowa.

PURPOSE: To understand referral practices for rectal cancer surgical care and to secondarily determine differences in referral practices by two main hypothesized drivers of referral: the rurality of the community endoscopists' practice and their affiliation with a colorectal surgeon. METHODS: Community gastroenterologists and general surgeons in Iowa completed a mailed questionnaire on practice demographics, volume, and referral practices for rectal cancer patients. Rurality was operationalized with RUCA codes. RESULTS: Twenty-two of 53 gastroenterologists (42%) and 120 of 188 general surgeons (64%) (total 144/241, 60%) in Iowa responded. Most performed colonoscopies, including 22 gastroenterologists (100%) and 96 general surgeons (80%). Regular referral of rectal cancer patients to colorectal surgeons was reported for 57% of urban physicians affiliated with a colorectal surgeon, 33% of urban physicians not affiliated with a colorectal surgeon, and 57% and 72% of physicians in large and small rural areas, respectively, who were not affiliated with a colorectal surgeon. High surgeon volume, high hospital volume, and colorectal surgeon specialty were important factors in the referral decisions for over half the physicians. 69% of diagnosing urban general surgeons reported performing rectal cancer surgery about half the time or more, while 85% of small rural and 60% of large rural diagnosing general surgeons reported never or rarely performing rectal cancer surgery. CONCLUSIONS: Diagnosing physicians have variable rectal cancer referral practices, including consistency in referred to surgeon and prioritization of volume and specialization. Prioritizing specialized or high-volume rectal cancer surgical care would require changing existing referring patterns.

Assessing Completeness of Cancer Treatment Data from an Academic Medical Center's Tumor Registry Through Comparison to the Central Registry.

Background: Researchers often rely on hospital tumor registry data to provide comprehensive cancer therapy information. The purpose of this study was to determine the completeness of treatment information found in the abstracted records of patients seen at an academic medical center located in a rural Midwestern state. Approach: The cohort included 846 Iowa residents diagnosed with a single malignant tumor of the female breast, colon/rectum, lung, pancreas, or prostate in 2017-2018 with an abstract recorded by the academic medical center and at least 1 other hospital. Treatment/no treatment agreement between the academic medical center's abstract and the central registry's consolidated abstract was examined for the following summary variables of the North American Association of Central Cancer Registries (NAACCR): surgery of the primary site, chemotherapy, radiation therapy, immunotherapy, and hormone therapy. Treatment summary variables from the academic medical center abstract that agreed with the corresponding variables from the central registry abstract were classified as concordant. The proportion of concordance for each treatment modality was the outcome measure, and 95% confidence intervals were calculated with the Agresti-Coull method. Concordance was also examined at the specific treatment level. Results: There was high concordance between the treatment information recorded in the academic medical center and the central registry records. The average proportion of treatment/no treatment agreement across all treatment modalities and cancer sites was 0.97 (SD, 0.02). Concordance remained high even when examining specific treatments (average concordance, 0.95; SD, 0.04). The lowest treatment/no treatment concordance proportion was 0.92 (95% CI, 0.86-0.96) for chemotherapeutic treatment of pancreatic cancer. We also found that the academic medical center's summary variables captured most treatments given at other facilities, ranging from 74.4% capture of immunotherapy to 88.2% capture of surgery of the primary site. Conclusions: These results indicate that NAACCR-formatted, summary variables from the academic medical center's tumor registry are likely to provide comprehensive treatment information for those individuals diagnosed or treated in this setting. Analyses of either the academic medical record registry records or consolidated records from the central registry should yield similar results. Future research should establish whether similar findings are obtained at other medical centers.

Well-being and stress vulnerability in ovarian cancer survivors during the COVID-19 pandemic.

OBJECTIVE: This study was designed to examine (1) whether ovarian cancer (OC) survivors would have greater well-being vs. elevated distress compared to community members during a universal health stressor (COVID-19) and (2) how resources and risk factors at diagnosis predicted vulnerability to a subsequent health-related stressor. METHODS: One hundred seventeen OC survivors were recruited from two academic medical centers and compared to a community-based sample on COVID-related distress and disruption. Latent class analysis identified differentially impacted groups of survivors. RESULTS: Survivors reported lower distress than community members. Predictors of higher distress included shorter-term survivorship, greater disruption, and poorer emotional well--being (EWB) at diagnosis. Survivors were divided into high- and low-COVID-19-impact subgroups; high-impact individuals endorsed higher perceived stress and lower EWB at diagnosis. CONCLUSION: Survivors reported lower COVID-related distress than community participants. While depression at diagnosis did not predict later distress, EWB was a strong predictor of response to a novel health-related stressor.

Comparing COVID-19 Response Behaviors between a Cancer Patient Sample and a Population-Based Cancer-Free Sample in a Rural Midwestern State.

INTRODUCTION: The COVID-19 pandemic caused an increase in fear, anxiety, and depressive symptoms globally. For populations at increased risk for adverse outcomes due to illness, such as cancer patients, these worries may have been exacerbated. Understanding how the pandemic impacted cancer patients will inform better preparation for future events that cause disturbances to cancer care delivery. METHODS: This study analyzed data from two surveys to determine whether cancer patients' responses differed from a cancer-free population-based sample in terms of concerns, preventive behaviors, and thoughts on their healthcare provider's communication regarding COVID-19 in a US Midwestern state. In August 2020, a survey was sent to 10,009 Iowans aged 18 and older, randomly selected from the 2018 Iowa voter registration file. In September 2020, a survey was emailed to 2,954 cancer patients aged 18 and older who opted into the University of Iowa Holden Comprehensive Cancer Center's Patients Enhancing Research Collaborations at Holden program. Previously validated and pretested Likert-type and multiple-choice items assessed concern regarding COVID-19, social distancing perception and behaviors, and demographic characteristics of respondents. We used χ2 tests and logistic regression to examine differences between the cancer patient and general population survey responses. RESULTS: We included 3,622 responses from the general population survey and 780 responses from the cancer patient survey in this analysis. Cancer patient survey respondents were more frequently older, lived in urban areas, had Medicare insurance coverage, had a college degree or higher, and were married. Cancer patients were more likely to report engaging in social distancing behaviors and greater concern regarding the pandemic. CONCLUSION: This study suggests differences in the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on cancer patients compared to cancer-free members of the general population. These results indicate the need for consideration of cancer patients' physical and mental health during large-scale disruptions to cancer care.

Diagnosing Provider, Referral Patterns, Facility Type, and Patient Satisfaction Among Iowa Rectal Cancer Patients.

PURPOSE: Rectal cancer treatment at high-volume centers is associated with higher likelihood of guideline-concordant care and improved outcomes. Whether rectal cancer patients are referred for treatment at high-volume hospitals may depend on diagnosing provider specialty. We aimed to determine associations of diagnosing provider specialty with treating provider specialty and characteristics of the treating facility for rectal cancer patients in Iowa. METHODS: Rectal cancer patients identified using the Iowa Cancer Registry completed a mailed survey on their treatment experience and decision-making process. Provider type was defined by provider specialty and whether the provider referred patients elsewhere for surgery. Multivariable-adjusted logistic regression models were used to examine predictors of being diagnosed by a general surgeon who also performed the subsequent surgery. RESULTS: Of 417 patients contacted, 381 (76%) completed the survey; our final analytical sample size was 267. Half of respondents were diagnosed by a gastroenterologist who referred them elsewhere; 30% were diagnosed by a general surgeon who referred them elsewhere, and 20% were diagnosed by a general surgeon who performed the surgery. Respondents who were ≥ 65 years old, had less than a college education, and who made < $50,000 per year were more likely to be diagnosed by a general surgeon who performed surgery. In multivariable-adjusted models, respondents diagnosed and treated by the same general surgeon were more likely to have surgery at hospitals with low annual colorectal cancer surgery volume and less likely to be satisfied with their care. CONCLUSIONS: Among rectal cancer patients in Iowa, respondents who were diagnosed and treated by the same provider were less likely to get treatment at a high-volume facility. This study informs the importance of provider referral in centralization of rectal cancer care.

Patterns of Evidence-Based Care for the Diagnosis, Staging, and First-line Treatment of Breast Cancer by Race-Ethnicity: A SEER-Medicare Study.

BACKGROUND: Racial and ethnic disparities in guideline-recommended breast cancer treatment are well documented, however studies including diagnostic and staging procedures necessary to determine treatment indications are lacking. The purpose of this study was to characterize patterns in delivery of evidence-based services for the diagnosis, clinical workup, and first-line treatment of breast cancer by race-ethnicity. METHODS: SEER-Medicare data were used to identify women diagnosed with invasive breast cancer between 2000 and 2017 at age 66 or older (n = 2,15,605). Evidence-based services included diagnostic procedures (diagnostic mammography and breast biopsy), clinical workup (stage and grade determination, lymph node biopsy, and HR and HER2 status determination), and treatment initiation (surgery, radiation, chemotherapy, hormone therapy, and HER2-targeted therapy). Poisson regression was used to estimate rate ratios (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) for each service. RESULTS: Black and American Indian/Alaska Native (AIAN) women had significantly lower rates of evidence-based care across the continuum from diagnostics through first-line treatment compared to non-Hispanic White (NHW) women. AIAN women had the lowest rates of HER2-targeted therapy and hormone therapy initiation. While Black women also had lower initiation of HER2-targeted therapy than NHW, differences in hormone therapy were not observed. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest patterns along the continuum of care from diagnostic procedures to treatment initiation may differ across race-ethnicity groups. IMPACT: Efforts to improve delivery of guideline-concordant treatment and mitigate racial-ethnic disparities in healthcare and survival should include procedures performed as part of the diagnosis, clinical workup, and staging processes.

Causal decomposition maps: An exploratory tool for designing area-level interventions aimed at reducing health disparities.

Methods for decomposition analyses have been developed to partition between-group differences into explained and unexplained portions. In this paper, we introduce the concept of causal decomposition maps, which allow researchers to test the effect of area-level interventions on disease maps before implementation. These maps quantify the impact of interventions that aim to reduce differences in health outcomes between groups and illustrate how the disease map might change under different interventions. We adapt a new causal decomposition analysis method for the disease mapping context. Through the specification of a Bayesian hierarchical outcome model, we obtain counterfactual small area estimates of age-adjusted rates and reliable estimates of decomposition quantities. We present two formulations of the outcome model, with the second allowing for spatial interference of the intervention. Our method is utilized to determine whether the addition of gyms in different sets of rural ZIP codes could reduce any of the rural-urban difference in age-adjusted colorectal cancer incidence rates in Iowa ZIP codes.

Effect of rurality and travel distance on contralateral prophylactic mastectomy for unilateral breast cancer.

PURPOSE: Despite lack of survival benefit, demand for contralateral prophylactic mastectomy (CPM) to treat unilateral breast cancer remains high. High uptake of CPM has been demonstrated in Midwestern rural women. Greater travel distance for surgical treatment is associated with CPM. Our objective was to examine the relationship between rurality and travel distance to surgery with CPM. METHODS: Women diagnosed with stages I-III unilateral breast cancer between 2007 and 2017 were identified using the National Cancer Database. Logistic regression was used to model likelihood of CPM based on rurality, proximity to metropolitan centers, and travel distance. A multinomial logistic regression model compared factors associated with CPM with reconstruction versus other surgical options. RESULTS: Both rurality (OR 1.10, 95% CI 1.06-1.15 for non-metro/rural vs. metro) and travel distance (OR 1.37, 95% CI 1.33-1.41 for those who traveled 50 + miles vs. < 30 miles) were independently associated with CPM. For women who traveled 30 + miles, odds of receiving CPM were highest for non-metro/rural women (OR 1.33 for 30-49 miles, OR 1.57 for 50 + miles; reference: metro women traveling < 30 miles). Non-metro/rural women who received reconstruction were more likely to undergo CPM regardless of travel distance (ORs 1.11-1.21). Both metro and metro-adjacent women who received reconstruction were more likely to undergo CPM only if they traveled 30 + miles (ORs 1.24-1.30). CONCLUSION: The impact of travel distance on likelihood of CPM varies by patient rurality and receipt of reconstruction. Further research is needed to understand how patient residence, travel burden, and geographic access to comprehensive cancer care services, including reconstruction, influence patient decisions regarding surgery.

Measuring and addressing health equity: an assessment of cancer center designation requirements.

PURPOSE: By requiring specific measures, cancer endorsements (e.g., accreditations, designations, certifications) promote high-quality cancer care. While 'quality' is the defining feature, less is known about how these endorsements consider equity. Given the inequities in access to high-quality cancer care, we assessed the extent to which equity structures, processes, and outcomes were required for cancer center endorsements. METHODS: We performed a content analysis of medical oncology, radiation oncology, surgical oncology, and research hospital endorsements from the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO), American Society of Radiation Oncology (ASTRO), American College of Surgeons Commission on Cancer (CoC), and the National Cancer Institute (NCI), respectively. We analyzed requirements for equity-focused content and compared how each endorsing body included equity as a requirement along three axes: structures, processes, and outcomes. RESULTS: ASCO guidelines centered on processes assessing financial, health literacy, and psychosocial barriers to care. ASTRO guidelines related to language needs and processes to address financial barriers. CoC equity-related guidelines focused on processes addressing financial and psychosocial concerns of survivors, and hospital-identified barriers to care. NCI guidelines considered equity related to cancer disparities research, inclusion of diverse groups in outreach and clinical trials, and diversification of investigators. None of the guidelines explicitly required measures of equitable care delivery or outcomes beyond clinical trial enrollment. CONCLUSION: Overall, equity requirements were limited. Leveraging the influence and infrastructure of cancer quality endorsements could enhance progress toward achieving cancer care equity. We recommend that endorsing organizations 1) require cancer centers to implement processes for measuring and tracking health equity outcomes and 2) engage diverse community stakeholders to develop strategies for addressing discrimination.

Understanding Implementation of Evidence-Based Interventions to Address Human Papillomavirus Vaccination: Qualitative Perspectives of Middle Managers.

Engaging individuals in middle management positions (eg, nurse or clinic managers) could facilitate implementation of evidence-based interventions (EBIs) to improve uptake of human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination. Our goal was to understand middle managers' role in and perspectives on implementation of EBIs for HPV vaccination. We conducted qualitative interviews with middle managers in pediatric and family practice clinics. We used constructs from the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) to design the interview guide and as a coding framework. Participants (n = 19) reported overseeing implementation related to HPV vaccination. Across interviews, CFIR inner setting constructs (eg, structural characteristics and implementation climate) were identified as being both barriers and facilitators. As evidenced in this study, middle managers have a deep understanding of organizational factors, and they have the ability to facilitate implementation efforts related to HPV vaccination. Future efforts could focus on engaging middle managers and leveraging their expertise and understanding of barriers and facilitators.

Adjuvant treatment of surgically treated bone metastasis patients: association with hospital characteristics and trends over time.

Patients with metastatic disease of the bone (MDB) often require surgical stabilization; however, there is not widespread consensus on subsequent adjuvant management. This study aimed to characterize utilization of perioperative adjuvant treatment among MDB patients. We identified 9413 surgically treated MDB patients with primary (breast, kidney, lung, prostate, or multiple myeloma) cancer from Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER)-Medicare data. Logistic regression was used to estimate odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) for receipt of chemotherapy, radiation, and bisphosphonates, respectively, in the adjuvant setting (90 days before or after surgery) by hospital characteristics-medical school affiliation, surgery volume, and Commission on Cancer (CoC) accreditation. Trends in treatment utilization by year of surgery were assessed via bar charts and Chi-square tests for trend. Patients surgically treated at major medical schools or high-volume facilities (compared to no medical school affiliation and low volume) had significantly higher odds of receiving radiation and chemotherapy, independent of patient and tumor characteristics (OR (95% CI); medical school: radiation 1.33 (1.19-1.49), chemotherapy 1.15 (1.02-1.30); and high volume: radiation 1.22 (1.11-1.34), chemotherapy 1.11 (1.02-1.22)). Patients surgically treated at CoC-accredited institutions, compared to non-accredited, had significantly higher odds of receiving radiation and bisphosphonates [radiation 1.24 (1.13-1.36); bisphosphonates 1.15 (1.04-1.28)]. Use of chemotherapy and bisphosphonates increased while radiation use declined over the study period from 1991 to 2014. Medical school affiliation, hospital volume, and CoC accreditation are associated with receipt of adjuvant treatment to prevent or manage pathologic fractures in MDB patients. Further investigation is needed to determine whether these associations reflect delivery of optimal care.

Identifying Core Functions of an Evidence-Based Intervention to Improve Cancer Care Quality in Rural Hospitals.

Background: Rural patients experience worse cancer survival outcomes than urban patients despite similar incidence rates, due in part to significant barriers to accessing quality cancer care. Community hospitals in non-metropolitan/rural areas play a crucial role in providing care to patients who desire and are able to receive care locally. However, rural community hospitals typically face challenges to providing comprehensive care due to lack of resources. The University of Kentucky's Markey Cancer Center Affiliate Network (MCCAN) is an effective complex, multi-level intervention, improving cancer care in rural/under-resourced hospitals by supporting them in achieving American College of Surgeons Commission on Cancer (CoC) standards. With the long-term goal of adapting MCCAN for other rural contexts, we aimed to identify MCCAN's core functions (i.e., the components key to the intervention's effectiveness/implementation) using theory-driven qualitative data research methods. Methods: We conducted eight semi-structured virtual interviews with administrators, coordinators, clinicians, and certified tumor registrars from five MCCAN affiliate hospitals that were not CoC-accredited prior to joining MCCAN. Study team members coded interview transcripts and identified themes related to how MCCAN engaged affiliate sites in improving care quality (intervention functions) and implementing CoC standards (implementation functions) and analyzed themes to identify core functions. We then mapped core functions onto existing theories of change and presented the functions to MCCAN leadership to confirm validity and completeness of the functions. Results: Intervention core functions included: providing expertise and templates for achieving accreditation, establishing a culture of quality-improvement among affiliates, and fostering a shared goal of quality care. Implementation core functions included: fostering a sense of community and partnership, building trust between affiliates and Markey, providing information and resources to increase feasibility and acceptability of meeting CoC standards, and mentoring and empowering administrators and clinicians to champion implementation. Conclusion: The MCCAN intervention presents a more equitable strategy of extending the resources and expertise of large cancer centers to assist smaller community hospitals in achieving evidence-based standards for cancer care. Using rigorous qualitative methods, we distilled this intervention into its core functions, positioning us (and others) to adapt the MCCAN intervention to address cancer disparities in other rural contexts.

Hospital Rurality and Gene Expression Profiling for Early-Stage Breast Cancer among Iowa Residents (2010-2018).

Objective: Given the challenges rural cancer patients face in accessing cancer care as well as the slower diffusion and adoption of new medical technologies among rural providers, the aim of our study was to examine trends in gene expression profiling (GEP) testing and evaluate the association between hospital rurality and receipt of GEP testing. Methods: Data from the Iowa Cancer Registry (ICR) were used to identify women with newly diagnosed, histologically confirmed breast cancer from 2010 through 2018 who met eligibility criteria for GEP testing. Patients were allocated to the hospitals where their most definitive surgical treatment was received, and Rural-Urban Commuting Area codes were used to categorize hospitals into urban (N = 43), large rural (N = 16), and small rural (N = 48). Adjusted odds ratios (aORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were estimated using multivariable logistic regression to evaluate the association between hospital rurality and GEP test use, adjusting for demographic and clinical characteristics. The association between test result and treatment received was assessed among patients who received Oncotype DX (ODX) testing. Results: Of 6,726 patients eligible for GEP test use, 46% (N = 3,069) underwent testing with 95% receiving ODX. While overall GEP testing rates increased over time from 42% between 2010 and 2012 to 51% between 2016 and 2018 (P trend < 0.0001), use continued to be the lowest among patients treated at hospitals in small rural areas. The odds of GEP testing remained significantly lower among patients treated at hospitals located in small rural areas (aOR 0.55; 95% CI 0.43-0.71), after adjusting for demographic and clinical characteristics. ODX recurrence scores were highly correlated with chemotherapy use across all strata of hospital rurality. Conclusions: GEP testing continues to be underutilized, especially among those treated at small rural hospitals. Targeted interventions aimed at increasing rates of GEP testing to ensure the appropriate use of adjuvant chemotherapy may improve health outcomes and lower treatment-related costs.

Association of Distance to Gynecologic Oncologist and Survival in a Rural Midwestern State.

Objectives: Rural ovarian cancer patients experience worse survival compared to urban patients. We assessed whether distance to gynecologic oncology specialists was associated with survival for patients in a rural state. Methods: Demographic, tumor, and treatment characteristics were extracted from the Iowa Cancer Registry for patients diagnosed between 1990 and 2018. Data were linked to the county-level 2018-2019 Area Health Resource File (number of surgeons and hospital beds per 100,000 population). Rurality was defined using 2013 Rural-Urban Continuum Codes; distance to the nearest gynecologic oncologist was calculated from the centroid of the county of residence to the centroid of the nearest county with a high volume health care center with a gynecologic oncologist. Associations with survival were assessed using multivariable Cox proportional hazards models. Results: Analyses included 1,562 ovarian cancer patients. Mean distance to gynecologic oncology was 60.8 miles, and median survival was 23 months. Unadjusted models showed increased distance from gynecologic oncology had progressively greater risk of death 30-49 miles (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.09, confidence interval [CI]: 1.04-1.15), 50-69 miles (HR = 1.19, CI: 1.07-1.32), 70+ miles (HR = 1.30, CI: 1.11-1.51). In adjusted models, association of distance to gynecologic oncology with risk of death was not significant; however, more advanced cancer stage and age, unmarried status, and higher county-level poverty were independently associated with increased risk of death. Conclusions: Above and beyond demographics and stage, distance to gynecologic oncology care was not an independent predictor of ovarian cancer survival. Further studies are needed to determine how to mitigate the factors contributing to worsened ovarian cancer survival among rural patients.

Hypertensive disorders of pregnancy among women with a history of leukemia or lymphoma.

OBJECTIVE: Hypertension during pregnancy can adversely affect maternal and fetal health. This study assessed whether diagnosis of leukemia or lymphoma prior to pregnancy is associated with hypertensive disorders of pregnancy including gestational hypertension, preeclampsia and eclampsia. STUDY DESIGN: A cross-sectional study used two statewide population-based datasets that linked birth certificates with sources of maternal medical history: hospital discharges in California and Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) cancer registry data in Iowa. Birth years included 2007-2012 in California and 1989-2018 in Iowa. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary outcome measure was hypertension in pregnancy measured from combined birth certificate and hospital diagnoses in California (for gestational hypertension, preeclampsia, or eclampsia) and birth certificate information (gestational hypertension or eclampsia) in Iowa. RESULTS: After adjusting for maternal age, race, education, smoking, and plurality, those with a history of leukemia/lymphoma were at increased risk of hypertensive disorders of pregnancy in Iowa (odds ratio (OR) = 1.86; 95% CI 1.07-3.23), but not in California (OR = 1.12; 95% CI 0.87-1.43). In sensitivity analysis restricting to more severe forms of hypertension in pregnancy (preeclampsia and eclampsia) in the California cohort, the effect estimate increased (OR = 1.29; 95% CI 0.96-1.74). CONCLUSION: In a population-based linked cancer registry-birth certificate study, an increased risk of hypertensive disorders of pregnancy was observed among leukemia or lymphoma survivors. Findings were consistent but non-significant in a second, more ethnically diverse study population with less precise cancer history data. Improved monitoring and surveillance may be warranted for leukemia or lymphoma survivors throughout their pregnancies.

Factors contributing to missed opportunities for human papillomavirus vaccination among adolescents, ages 11 to 13, in Iowa.

Introduction: Rates of human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination remain low and missed opportunities for HPV vaccination are widespread. Researchers have identified factors related to HPV vaccination, but less is known about missed opportunities. Methods: We used medical claims data from a large Midwestern insurance provider to explore relationships between adolescent and provider characteristics and missed opportunities for HPV vaccination. We stratified models by initiation status with adolescents who had received one or more HPV vaccinations in one group (n = 6,123) and adolescents with no record of an HPV vaccination in the other (n = 8,107). Results: There were significant differences in comparisons of all variables between initiators and non-initiators. Notably, non-initiators had lower rates of vaccination for HPV and other adolescent vaccinations, and fewer well-child visits. For all adolescents, birth year, having other recommended vaccines, and number of well-child visits were significantly associated with missed opportunities. Additionally, among initiators, pediatrician as a primary care provider and being in a rural area were significantly associated. Discussion: Overall, adolescents with greater healthcare utilization had more missed opportunities, indicating that, despite increased numbers of visits, providers are not taking advantage of these opportunities to vaccinate. Future research should prioritize developing a deeper understanding of why these missed opportunities are occurring and implementing new and existing strategies to prevent them. Reducing missed opportunities will help to prevent future HPV-related cancers and the significant morbidity and mortality that they can cause.