Broadening Eligibility Criteria and Diversity among Patients for Cancer Clinical Trials.

BACKGROUND: Certain populations have been historically underrepresented in clinical trials. Broadening eligibility criteria is one approach to inclusive clinical research and achieving enrollment goals. How broadened trial eligibility criteria affect the diversity of eligible participants is unknown. METHODS: Using a nationwide electronic health record-derived deidentified database, we identified a retrospective cohort of patients diagnosed with 22 cancer types between April 1, 2013 and December 31, 2022 who received systemic therapy (N=235,234) for cancer. We evaluated strict versus broadened eligibility criteria using performance status and liver, kidney, and hematologic function around first line of therapy. We performed logistic regression to estimate odds ratios for exclusion by strict criteria and their association with measures of patient diversity, including sex, age, race or ethnicity, and area-level socioeconomic status (SES); estimated the impact of broadening criteria on the number and distribution of eligible patients; and performed Cox regression to estimate hazard ratios for real-world overall survival (rwOS) comparing patients meeting strict versus broadened criteria. RESULTS: When applying common strict cutoffs for eligibility criteria to patients with complete data and weighting each cancer type equally, 48% of patients were eligible for clinical trials. Female (odds ratio, 1.30; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.25 to 1.35), older (age 75+ vs. 18 to 49 years old: odds ratio, 3.04; 95% CI, 2.85 to 3.24), Latinx (odds ratio, 1.46; 95% CI, 1.39 to 1.54), non-Latinx Black (odds ratio, 1.11; 95% CI, 1.06 to 1.16), and lower-SES patients were more likely to be excluded using strict eligibility criteria. Broadening criteria increased the number of eligible patients by 78%, with the strongest impact for older, female, non-Latinx Black, and lower-SES patients. Patients who met only broadened criteria had worse rwOS versus those with strict criteria (hazard ratio, 1.31; 95% CI, 1.27 to 1.34). CONCLUSIONS: Data-driven evaluation of clinical trial eligibility criteria may optimize the eligibility of certain historically underrepresented groups and promote access to more inclusive trials. (Sponsored by Flatiron Health.).

Racialized economic segregation and inequities in treatment initiation and survival among patients with metastatic breast cancer.

PURPOSE: Racialized economic segregation, a form of structural racism, may drive persistent inequities among patients with breast cancer. We examined whether a composite area-level index of racialized economic segregation was associated with real-world treatment and survival in metastatic breast cancer (mBC). METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study among adult women with mBC using a US nationwide electronic health record-derived de-identified database (2011-2022). Population-weighted quintiles of the index of concentration at the extremes were estimated using census tract data. To identify inequities in time to treatment initiation (TTI) and overall survival (OS), we employed Kaplan-Meier methods and estimated hazard ratios (HR) adjusted for clinical factors. RESULTS: The cohort included 27,459 patients. Compared with patients from the most privileged areas, those from the least privileged areas were disproportionately Black (36.9% vs. 2.6%) or Latinx (13.2% vs. 2.6%) and increasingly diagnosed with de novo mBC (33.6% vs. 28.9%). Those from the least privileged areas had longer median TTI than those from the most privileged areas (38 vs 31 days) and shorter median OS (29.7 vs 39.2 months). Multivariable-adjusted HR indicated less timely treatment initiation (HR 0.87, 95% CI 0.83, 0.91, p < 0.01) and worse OS (HR 1.19, 95% CI 1.13, 1.25, p < 0.01) among those from the least privileged areas compared to the most privileged areas. CONCLUSION: Racialized economic segregation is a social determinant of health associated with treatment and survival inequities in mBC. Public investments directly addressing racialized economic segregation and other forms of structural racism are needed to reduce inequities in cancer care and outcomes.

Diagnoses and Treatment of Behavioral and Psychological Symptoms of Dementia Among Racially and Ethnically Diverse Persons Living with Dementia.

Background: Behavioral and psychological symptoms of dementia (BPSD) and prescribed central nervous system (CNS) active drugs to treat them are prevalent among persons living with Alzheimer's disease and related dementias (PLWD) and lead to negative outcomes for PLWD and their caregivers. Yet, little is known about racial/ethnic disparities in diagnosis and use of drugs to treat BPSD. Objective: Quantify racial/ethnic disparities in BPSD diagnoses and CNS-active drug use among community-dwelling PLWD. Methods: We used a retrospective cohort of community-dwelling Medicare Fee-for-Service beneficiaries with dementia, continuously enrolled in Parts A, B and D, 2017-2019. Multivariate logistic models estimated rates of BPSD diagnosis and, conditional on diagnosis, CNS-active drug use. Results: Among PLWD, 67.1% had diagnoses of an affective, psychosis or hyperactivity symptom. White (68.3%) and Hispanic (63.9%) PLWD were most likely, Blacks (56.6%) and Asians (52.7%) least likely, to have diagnoses. Among PLWD with BPSD diagnoses, 78.6% took a CNS-active drug. Use was highest among whites (79.3%) and Hispanics (76.2%) and lowest among Blacks (70.8%) and Asians (69.3%). Racial/ethnic differences in affective disorders were pronounced, 56.8% of white PLWD diagnosed; Asians had the lowest rates (37.8%). Similar differences were found in use of antidepressants. Conclusions: BPSD diagnoses and CNS-active drug use were common in our study. Lower rates of BPSD diagnoses in non-white compared to white populations may indicate underdiagnosis in clinical settings of treatable conditions. Clinicians' review of prescriptions in this population to reduce poor outcomes is important as is informing care partners on the risks/benefits of using CNS-active drugs.

Sociodemographic inequities in COVID-19 vaccination among adults in the United States, 2022.

BACKGROUND: Despite the availability of COVID-19 vaccines since December 2020, sociodemographic inequities in vaccination and preventable COVID-related deaths persist. To inform efforts for equitable COVID-19 vaccination campaigns, a comprehensive national evaluation of existing inequities is necessary. OBJECTIVE: To examine sociodemographic inequities in COVID-19 vaccination receipt using data from the 2022 National Health Interview Survey (NHIS). METHODS: This secondary data analysis used cross-sectional nationally-representative data from the 2022 NHIS to assess vaccination inequities among 27,126 adults. Separate Poisson regressions adjusted for clinical factors (e.g., age, sex, high-risk health conditions) were used to evaluate vaccination inequities across sociographic factors (e.g., race/ethnicity, poverty, health insurance). RESULTS: In 2022, 79.6% of adults received at ≥ 1 vaccine dose, 75.0% received ≥ 2 doses ("fully vaccinated"), 45.7% received ≥ 3 doses (≥ 1 booster), and 17.2% received ≥ 4 doses (≥ 2 boosters). Marked inequities were evident in COVID-19 vaccination across primary and booster doses, especially receipt of at least 1 booster dose (≥ 3 doses). Black (35.7%, prevalence ratio [PR] 0.78 [95% CI 0.74-0.83]) and Latinx (35.5%, PR 0.82 [CI 0.78-0.86]) adults were less likely to receive ≥ 3 doses than Asian (66.5%, PR 1.41 [CI 1.35-1.48]) and White (48.8%) adults. Poverty (31.1% [PR 0.65 {CI 0.61-0.69}] vs. 50.7%) and food insecurity (27.1% [PR 0.63 {CI 0.58-0.68}] vs. 47.3%) were negatively associated with receipt of ≥ 3 vaccine doses. Adults without usual source of care (24.9%, PR 0.61 [CI 0.57-0.65]) or health insurance (17.4%, PR 0.40 [CI 0.36-0.45]) had much lower rates of ≥ 3 doses than those with appropriate health care access (48.7% and 51.9%, respectively). CONCLUSION: As of 2022, 1-in-5 U.S. adults remain unvaccinated, and more than half have not received any recommended booster doses. Economically/socially marginalized populations-including Black and Latinx adults and those with structural barriers such as poverty, food insecurity, and poor health care access-were less likely to receive a booster. Addressing these vaccination inequities is crucial to achieve equitable COVID-19 protection and reduce preventable deaths among economically/socially marginalized populations.

Association Between Pharmacy Proximity With Cardiovascular Medication Use and Risk Factor Control in the United States.

BACKGROUND: Poor neighborhood-level access to health care, including community pharmacies, contributes to cardiovascular disparities in the United States. The authors quantified the association between pharmacy proximity, antihypertensive and statin use, and blood pressure (BP) and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) among a large, diverse US cohort. METHODS AND RESULTS: A cross-sectional analysis of Black and White participants in the REGARDS (Reasons for Geographic and Racial Differences in Stroke) study during 2013 to 2016 was conducted. The authors designated pharmacy proximity by census tract using road network analysis with population-weighted centroids within a 10-minute drive time, with 5- and 20-minute sensitivity analyses. Pill bottle review measured medication use, and BP and LDL-C were assessed using standard methods. Poisson regression was used to quantify the association between pharmacy proximity with medication use and BP control, and linear regression for LDL-C. Among 16 150 REGARDS participants between 2013 and 2016, 8319 (51.5%) and 8569 (53.1%) had an indication for antihypertensive and statin medication, respectively, and pharmacy proximity data. The authors did not find a consistent association between living in a census tract with higher pharmacy proximity and antihypertensive medication use, BP control, or statin medication use and LDL-C levels, regardless of whether the area was rural, suburban, or urban. Results were similar among the 5- and 20-minute drive-time analyses. CONCLUSIONS: Living in a low pharmacy proximity census tract may be associated with antihypertensive and statin medication use, or with BP control and LDL-C levels. Although, in this US cohort, outcomes were similar for adults living in high or low pharmacy proximity census tracts.

Changes in HIV Pre-exposure Prophylaxis (PrEP) Coverage at State and County Level During the COVID-19 Pandemic in the United States.

This study quantifies the prevalence and trends in weekly PrEP coverage at the national, state and county-level, before and during the COVID-19 pandemic in the United States.We estimated weekly PrEP coverage using longitudinal individual-level pharmacy claims from IQVIA LRx for a cohort of PrEP users (N = 287,493) ages 16 to 85 years between December 29th, 2019 and November 8th, 2020. Weekly PrEP coverage was defined as PrEP use among individuals at high risk for HIV. We conducted an interrupted time series analysis to quantify changes in weekly PrEP coverage before (December 29th, 2019 - March 8th, 2020) and during (March 29th - November 8th, 2020) the COVID-19 pandemic at the national, state and county-level by county characteristics, specifically by EHE priority jurisdiction, racial/ethnic composition, and urbanity. Nationally, weekly PrEP coverage among individuals ages 16 to 85 at high risk for HIV declined by 11.5% (from 11.0% before to 9.5% during the pandemic; t = 8.02,p < 0.01). Weekly PrEP coverage declined in all states and most counties yet varied substantially across states and counties. Geographic disparities in weekly PrEP coverage were also observed between urban EHE priority counties with significantly lower rates in counties with ≥ 50% Black/Latinx population when compared to their counterparts (7.9% vs. 11.2%; t = 18.91,p < 0.01);these disparities were most pronounced in California and New York. Weekly PrEP coverage was much lower than the 25% annual coverage reported by the Centers for Disease Control and geographic disparities observed within states likely contribute to the persistent racial/ethnic disparities in new HIV diagnoses observed within those states.

Risk of contralateral breast cancer among Asian/Pacific Islander women in the United States.

PURPOSE: While breast cancer studies often aggregate Asian/Pacific Islander (API) women, as a single group or exclude them, this population is heterogeneous in terms of genetic background, environmental exposures, and health-related behaviors, potentially resulting in different cancer outcomes. Our purpose was to evaluate risks of contralateral breast cancer (CBC) among subgroups of API women with breast cancer. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of women ages 18 + years diagnosed with stage I-III breast cancer between 2000 and 2016 in the Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results registries. API subgroups included Chinese, Japanese, Filipina, Native Hawaiian, Korean, Vietnamese, Indian/Pakistani, and other API women. Asynchronous CBC was defined as breast cancer diagnosed in the opposite breast 12 + months after first primary unilateral breast cancer. Multivariable-adjusted subdistribution hazard ratios (SHR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were estimated and stratified by API subgroups. RESULTS: From a cohort of 44,362 API women with breast cancer, 25% were Filipina, 18% were Chinese, 14% were Japanese, and 8% were Indian/Pakistani. API women as an aggregate group had increased risk of CBC (SHR 1.15, 95% CI 1.08-1.22) compared to NHW women, among whom Chinese (SHR 1.23, 95% CI 1.08-1.40), Filipina (SHR 1.37, 95% CI 1.23-1.52), and Native Hawaiian (SHR 1.69, 95% CI 1.37-2.08) women had greater risks. CONCLUSION: Aggregating or excluding API patients from breast cancer studies ignores their heterogeneous health outcomes. To advance cancer health equity among API women, future research should examine inequities within the API population to design interventions that can adequately address their unique differences.

Sociodemographic Inequities in Telemedicine Use Among US Patients Initiating Treatment in Community Cancer Centers During the Ongoing COVID-19 Pandemic, 2020-2022.

PURPOSE: Although telemedicine was seen as a way to improve cancer care during the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic, there is limited information regarding inequities in its uptake. This study assessed sociodemographic factors associated with telemedicine use among patients initiating treatment for 20 common cancers. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study used deidentified electronic health record-derived patient data from a nationwide network of community cancer practices, linked to area-level Census information. We included adults (age 18 years and older) who initiated first-line systemic cancer treatment between March 2020 and December 2022 (follow-up through March 2023). Exposures include race/ethnicity, insurance status, and area-level social determinants of health (eg, block group socioeconomic status [SES]). The outcome was telemedicine use within 90 days after treatment initiation. Associations were examined using logistic regression models adjusted for age, sex, performance status, stage, and cancer type. RESULTS: This study included 36,993 patients (48.6% women; median age, 69 years), of whom 15.1% used telemedicine services. Black (12.2%; odds ratio [OR], 0.78 [95% CI, 0.70 to 0.88]) and uninsured (9.2%; OR, 0.59 [95% CI, 0.48 to 0.73]) patients were less likely to use telemedicine services than their White and well-insured counterparts (14.5% and 15.0%, respectively). Patients in rural (9.7%; OR, 0.54 [95% CI, 0.46 to 0.57]), suburban (11.8%; OR, 0.67 [95% CI, 0.61 to 0.74]), and low SES areas (9.9%; OR, 0.39 [95% CI, 0.35 to 0.43]) were less also likely to use telemedicine than their counterparts in urban (16.6%) or high SES (21.6%) areas. CONCLUSION: Nearly one sixth of patients initiating cancer treatment during the pandemic used telemedicine, but there were substantial inequities. The proliferation of telemedicine may perpetuate cancer care inequities if marginalized populations do not have equitable access.

Socioeconomic status and inequities in treatment initiation and survival among patients with cancer, 2011-2022.

BACKGROUND: Lower neighborhood socioeconomic status (SES) is associated with suboptimal cancer care and reduced survival. Most studies examining cancer inequities across area-level socioeconomic status tend to use less granular or unidimensional measures and pre-date the COVID-19 pandemic. Here, we examined the association of area-level socioeconomic status on real-world treatment initiation and overall survival among adults with 20 common cancers. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study used electronic health record-derived deidentified data (Flatiron Health Research Database, 2011-2022) linked to US Census Bureau data from the American Community Survey (2015-2019). Area-level socioeconomic status quintiles (based on a measure incorporating income, home values, rental costs, poverty, blue-collar employment, unemployment, and education information) were computed from the US population and applied to patients based on their mailing address. Associations were examined using Cox proportional hazards models adjusted for diagnosis year, age, sex, performance status, stage, and cancer type. RESULTS: This cohort included 291 419 patients (47.7% female; median age = 68 years). Patients from low-SES areas were younger and more likely to be Black (21.9% vs 3.3%) or Latinx (8.4% vs 3.0%) than those in high-SES areas. Living in low-SES areas (vs high) was associated with lower treatment rates (hazard ratio = 0.94 [95% confidence interval = 0.93 to 0.95]) and reduced survival (median real-world overall survival = 21.4 vs 29.5 months, hazard ratio = 1.20 [95% confidence interval = 1.18 to 1.22]). Treatment and survival inequities were observed in 9 and 19 cancer types, respectively. Area-level socioeconomic inequities in treatment and survival remained statistically significant in the COVID-19 era (after March 2020). CONCLUSION: To reduce inequities in cancer outcomes, efforts that target marginalized, low-socioeconomic status neighborhoods are necessary.

Racial and Ethnic Inequities in US Oncology Clinical Trial Participation From 2017 to 2022.

Importance: There is increasing recognition from regulatory agencies that racial and ethnic representation in clinical trials is inadequate and linked to health inequities. The extent of racial inequities in clinical trial participation is unclear because prior studies have synthesized enrollment data from published trials, which often do not report participant race and ethnicity. Objective: To evaluate racial and ethnic inequities in oncology clinical trial participation in a contemporary cohort of patients with cancer before and during the COVID-19 pandemic. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study used a nationwide electronic health record-derived deidentified database, which includes data for approximately 280 US cancer clinics (approximately 800 sites of care). The study included Latinx, non-Latinx Black (hereinafter, Black), and non-Latinx White (reference; hereinafter, White) patients aged 18 years or older who had been diagnosed with advanced non-small cell lung cancer, metastatic colorectal cancer, metastatic breast cancer, multiple myeloma, or metastatic pancreatic cancer between January 1, 2017, and June 30, 2022 (follow-up through December 31, 2022). Data analysis was performed between August 1, 2022, and February 7, 2023. Exposures: Electronic health record-documented race and ethnicity. Main Outcomes and Measures: The main outcome was oncology trial participation (ie, receipt of a clinical study drug). Stratified cause-specific hazard models were used to estimate adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% CIs for likelihood of participation. Participation was assessed overall, by cancer type, and by period of diagnosis (2017-2019 vs 2020-2022). Results: Of the 50 411 patients in this study, 28 878 (57.3%) were women and 21 533 (42.7%) were men. Black and Latinx patients were younger than White patients, with a median age of 65 (IQR, 57-72), 64 (IQR, 54-73), and 68 (IQR, 60-76) years, respectively. Oncology trial participation was lower among Black patients (307 of 6912 [4.4%]) and Latinx patients (166 of 3973 [4.2%]) relative to White patients (2858 of 39 526 [7.2%]) over the entire study period. Inequities in participation were observed across the 5 cancer types studied, with notably large inequities observed among Black patients (HR, 0.54 [95% CI, 0.36-0.81]) and Latinx patients (HR, 0.46 [95% CI, 0.27-0.77]) with metastatic pancreatic cancer. Moreover, inequities between Black and White patients in terms of participation widened among those diagnosed in the COVID-19 era (2020-2022: HR, 0.49 [95% CI, 0.40-0.60] vs 1.00 [95% CI, 0.93-1.09]) relative to those diagnosed before the pandemic (2017-2019: HR, 0.61 [95% CI, 0.53-0.70] vs 1 [reference]). Conclusions and Relevance: The findings of this cohort study suggest that oncology trial participation was lower among Black and Latinx patients relative to White patients across all 5 cancer types examined. These findings, including potentially widening inequities in the COVID-19 era, support the need for regulatory guidance to improve enrollment of participants from historically excluded racial and ethnic populations in clinical trials.

Citizenship status and cost-related nonadherence in the United States, 2017-2021.

OBJECTIVE: To assess inequities in prescription medication use and subsequent cost-related nonadherence (CRN) and cost-saving strategies by citizenship status in the United States. DATA SOURCES/STUDY SETTING: National Health Interview Survey (2017-2021). STUDY DESIGN: This cross-sectional study examined noncitizen (n = 8596), naturalized citizen (n = 12,800), and US-born citizen (n = 120,195) adults. We also examined older adults (≥65 years) separately, including noncitizens without Medicare (a group of importance given their immigration-related barriers to health care access). Multiple mediation analysis was used to examine differences in CRN and determine whether economic, health care, and immigration factors explain observed inequities. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Noncitizens (41.9%) were less likely to use prescription medications than naturalized (60.5%) and US-born citizens (68.2%). Among prescription medication users, noncitizens (13.8%) were more likely to report CRN than naturalized (9.5%) and US-born citizens (11.0%). CRN differences between noncitizens and naturalized citizens (OR 1.38, 95% CI 1.21-1.44) and between noncitizens and US-born citizens (OR 1.23, 95% CI 1.07-1.35) were explained by insurance status and food insecurity. Only 4.9% of medication users turned to alternative therapies to lower their drug costs, but there were no substantial differences across citizenship status. More medication users requested lower-cost prescriptions (19.0%); however, noncitizens were less likely to make these requests. Older noncitizens without Medicare, of whom 23.9% requested lower-cost drugs, were an exception. Noncitizens (5.8%), particularly older noncitizens without Medicare (21.8%), were more likely to import their drugs than naturalized (3.5%) and US-born citizens (1.2%). CONCLUSIONS: Noncitizens experience a high burden of cost-related barriers to prescription medications. Efforts to reduce these inequities should focus on dismantling health care and food access barriers, regardless of citizenship status.

Residence in Hispanic/Latino Immigrant Neighborhoods, Away-From-Home Food Consumption, and Diet Quality: The Hispanic Community Health Study/Study of Latinos.

BACKGROUND: Hispanics/Latinos are disproportionately burdened by nutrition-related diseases but immigrants appear healthier than their US-born counterparts. Neighborhoods characterized by high Hispanic/Latino immigrant segregation may provide environments to support healthier diets. OBJECTIVE: To examine whether or not Hispanic/Latino immigrant segregation is associated with frequency of away-from-home food consumption and diet quality in a large, diverse sample of Hispanic/Latino adults. DESIGN: Cross-sectional baseline data from the Hispanic Community Health Study/Study of Latinos were analyzed (2008-2011). Residential addresses were geocoded and linked to census tract-level 2008-2012 American Community Survey data. Hispanic/Latino immigrant segregation was characterized using the local Getis-Ord Gi∗ statistic, a spatial clustering measure that quantifies the extent to which demographically similar neighborhoods group together. PARTICIPANTS/SETTING: Participants were 15,661 adults in the Hispanic Community Health Study/Study of Latinos, a population-based study of Hispanic/Latinos aged 18 to 74 years from 4 US regions (Bronx, NY; Chicago, IL; Miami, FL; and San Diego, CA). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Away-from-home food consumption was assessed using a modified dietary behavior questionnaire. Diet quality was assessed using the Alternate Healthy Eating Index 2010 (range = 0 to 110) from two 24-hour recalls. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Multilevel linear and logistic regression with multilevel weights were used to estimate associations between Hispanic/Latino immigrant segregation (low, medium, or high) with Alternate Healthy Eating Index 2010 score, and away-from-home food consumption (≥3 vs <3 times/week) in separate models, respectively. The mediating role of neighborhood poverty and whether or not associations differed by nativity were also assessed. RESULTS: Higher levels of segregation were associated with higher adjusted mean Alternate Healthy Eating Index 2010 scores; estimates were further magnified after accounting for neighborhood poverty (low segregation: reference category; medium segregation: ß = 2.43, 95% CI 1.10 to 3.77; and high segregation: ß = 1.63, 95% CI .43 to 2.82). Associations were strongest among the foreign-born compared with the US-born. There was no association between segregation and away-from-home food consumption. CONCLUSIONS: These results highlight the potential role of Hispanic/Latino immigrant neighborhoods in supporting healthy diets among residents, especially immigrants.

Mediation of Racial and Ethnic Inequities in the Diagnosis of Advanced-Stage Cervical Cancer by Insurance Status.

Importance: Black and Hispanic or Latina women are more likely than White women to receive a diagnosis of and to die of cervical cancer. Health insurance coverage is associated with diagnosis at an earlier stage of cervical cancer. Objective: To evaluate the extent to which racial and ethnic differences in the diagnosis of advanced-stage cervical cancer are mediated by insurance status. Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective, cross-sectional population-based study used data from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) program on an analytic cohort of 23 942 women aged 21 to 64 years who received a diagnosis of cervical cancer between January 1, 2007, and December 31, 2016. Statistical analysis was performed from February 24, 2022, to January 18, 2023. Exposures: Health inusurance status (private or Medicare insurance vs Medicaid or uninsured). Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was a diagnosis of advanced-stage cervical cancer (regional or distant stage). Mediation analyses were performed to assess the proportion of observed racial and ethnic differences in the stage at diagnosis that were mediated by health insurance status. Results: A total of 23 942 women (median age at diagnosis, 45 years [IQR, 37-54 years]; 12.9% were Black, 24.5% were Hispanic or Latina, and 52.9% were White) were included in the study. A total of 59.4% of the cohort had private or Medicare insurance. Compared with White women, patients of all other racial and ethnic groups had a lower proportion with a diagnosis of early-stage cervical cancer (localized) (American Indian or Alaska Native, 48.7%; Asian or Pacific Islander, 49.9%; Black, 41.7%; Hispanic or Latina, 51.6%; and White, 53.3%). A larger proportion of women with private or Medicare insurance compared with women with Medicaid or uninsured received a diagnosis of an early-stage cancer (57.8% [8082 of 13 964] vs 41.1% [3916 of 9528]). In models adjusting for age, year of diagnosis, histologic type, area-level socioeconomic status, and insurance status, Black women had higher odds of receiving a diagnosis of advanced-stage cervical cancer compared with White women (odds ratio, 1.18 [95% CI, 1.08-1.29]). Health insurance was associated with mediation of more than half (ranging from 51.3% [95% CI, 51.0%-51.6%] for Black women to 55.1% [95% CI, 53.9%-56.3%] for Hispanic or Latina women) the racial and ethnic inequities in the diagnosis of advanced-stage cervical cancer across all racial and ethnic minority groups compared with White women. Conclusions and Relevance: This cross-sectional study of SEER data suggests that insurance status was a substantial mediator of racial and ethnic inequities in advanced-stage cervical cancer diagnoses. Expanding access to care and improving the quality of services rendered for uninsured patients and those covered by Medicaid may mitigate the known inequities in cervical cancer diagnosis and related outcomes.

Citizenship Status and Mortality Among Young Latino Adults in the U.S., 1998‒2015.

INTRODUCTION: Although Latino immigrants, especially noncitizens, endure structural factors that may increase their risk of death at younger ages, little is known about their risk of death in young adulthood. This study evaluates mortality differences across citizenship status among young Latino adults (aged 18-44 years) in the U.S. METHODS: This study used the National Health Interview Survey (1998-2014) with mortality follow-up through 2015. Cox regression models adjusted for age and sex were used to determine baseline differences in mortality. Models adjusted for socioeconomic factors (i.e., English proficiency, education, poverty, and health insurance) were used to determine whether socioeconomic conditions attenuate mortality differences. RESULTS: Participants included noncitizens (n=48,388), naturalized citizens (n=16,241), and U.S.-born citizens (n=63,388). Noncitizens (hazard ratio [HR]=1.40, 95% CI=1.31, 1.51), but not naturalized citizens (HR=1.04, 95% CI=0.94, 1.16), were at greater risk of all-cause death than U.S.-born citizens. Both noncitizens (HR=2.46, 95% CI=2.07, 2.92) and naturalized citizens (HR=1.76, 95% CI=1.40, 2.21) were more likely to die of cancer. Noncitizens were also at a greater risk of death because of cardiometabolic diseases (HR=1.46, 95% CI=1.20, 1.78) and accidents (HR=1.33, 95% CI=1.14, 1.55). Socioeconomic factors attenuated differences in all-cause, cardiometabolic, and accidental deaths, but not differences in cancer mortality. CONCLUSIONS: Contrary to the long-held notion of the healthy migrant, young Latino immigrants, especially noncitizens, are at increased risk of death than their U.S.-born counterparts. Efforts to reduce these disparities should focus on improving their socioeconomic conditions and healthcare access early in adulthood.

Impact of socioeconomic status and rurality on cancer-specific survival among women with de novo metastatic breast cancer by race/ethnicity.

PURPOSE: There are approximately 150,000 women living with metastatic breast cancer (mBC) in the United States. Disparities in de novo mBC incidence and mortality exist across race/ethnicity, socioeconomic status (SES), and rurality. However, how SES and rurality independently impact mBC outcomes across different racial/ethnic groups is not fully understood. The purpose of this study was to determine the impact of SES and rurality on cancer-specific mortality among women with mBC by race/ethnicity. METHODS: We conducted a large, population-based retrospective cohort study in women aged 18 + years diagnosed with de novo mBC using the Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results Census Tract-level SES and Rurality Database (2000-2015). Associations between SES/rurality and cancer-specific mortality were determined using Fine and Gray regression models. Subdistribution hazard ratios (SHR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) by race/ethnicity and hormone receptor (HR) status were calculated. RESULTS: A cohort of 33,976 women were included with the majority being White (67%), 17% Black, 0.4% American Indian/Alaskan Native, 6% Asian/Pacific Islander, and 10% Latina/Hispanic. We observed the greatest increased risk of BC mortality among Black women with HR-negative mBC residing in neighborhoods with lower SES (lowest versus highest quintile: SHR 1.38, 95% CI 1.00-1.90) and in rural areas compared to urban areas (SHR 1.27, 95% CI 1.01-1.59). CONCLUSION: Overall, BC-specific survival among women with de novo mBC differs by race/ethnicity, with the greatest adverse impacts of SES and rurality affecting Black women with HR-negative disease.

Global, regional and national trends in statin utilisation in high-income and low/middle-income countries, 2015-2020.

OBJECTIVE: Prior studies have reported inequitable global access to essential medicines for cardiovascular disease (CVD) prevention, especially statins. Here we examine recent trends and disparities in statin utilisation at the income group, regional and country levels. DESIGN: Ecological study. Pharmaceutical sales data were used to examine statin utilisation in high-income counties (HICs) and low/middle-income countries (LMICs) from 2015 to 2020. Population estimates were obtained from the Global Burden of Disease. Fixed-effects panel regression analysis was used to examine associations between statin utilisation and country-level factors. SETTING: Global, including 41 HICs and 50 LMICs. PARTICIPANTS: Population older than 40 years of age. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: Statin utilisation was measured using defined daily doses (DDDs) per 1000 population ≥40 years per day (TPD). RESULTS: Globally, statin utilisation increased 24.7% from 54.7 DDDs/TPD in 2015 to 68.3 DDDs/TPD in 2020. However, regional and income group disparities persisted during this period. In 2020, statin utilisation was more than six times higher in HICs than LMICs (192.4 vs 28.4 DDDs/TPD, p<0.01). Substantial disparities were also observed between LMICs, ranging from 3.1 DDDs/TPD in West African nations to 225.0 DDDs/TPD in Lebanon in 2020. While statin utilisation increased in most LMICs between 2015 and 2020, several experienced declines in utilisation, most notably Venezuela (-85.1%, from 92.3 to 14.0 DDDs/TPD). In LMICs, every $100 increase in per capita health spending was associated with a 17% increase in statin utilisation, while every 10% increase in out-of-pocket health spending was associated with a 11% decline (both p<0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Despite global increases in statin utilisation, there are substantial regional and country-level disparities between HICs and LMICs. To address global CVD disparities, policymakers should promote increased and equitable access to statins in LMICs.

Access to pharmacies and pharmacy services in New York City, Los Angeles, Chicago, and Houston, 2015-2020.

BACKGROUND: Despite the importance of pharmacies in ensuring medications and health care needs are met, there is limited up-to-date information regarding access to pharmacies or their services in the United States. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate trends and disparities in access to pharmacies in 4 largest cities in the United States, New York City, Los Angeles, Houston, and Chicago, by neighborhood racial and ethnic composition from 2015 to 2020. METHODS: Data from the National Council for Prescription Drug Programs (2015-2020) and the American Community Survey (2015-2019) were used. We examined neighborhoods (i.e., census tracts) and evaluated disparities in "pharmacy deserts" (low-income neighborhoods (1) whose average distance to the nearest pharmacy was at least 1 mile or (2) whose average distance to the nearest pharmacy was at least 0.5 mile and at least 100 households had no vehicle access). We also evaluated the differences in pharmacy closures and the availability of pharmacy services. RESULTS: From 2015 to 2020, the percent of neighborhoods with pharmacy deserts declined in New York City (from 1.6% to 0.9% of neighborhoods, P < 0.01), remained stable in Los Angeles (13.7% to 13.4%, P = 0.58) and Houston (27.0% to 28.5%, P = 0.18), and increased in Chicago (15.0% to 19.9%, P < 0.01). Pharmacy deserts were persistently more common in Black and Latino neighborhoods in all 4 cities. As of 2020, pharmacies in Black and Latino neighborhoods were also more likely to close and less likely to offer immunization, 24-hour, and drive-through services than pharmacies in other neighborhoods. CONCLUSION: To reduce disparities in access to medications and health care services, including those in response to the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic (e.g., testing and vaccinations), policies that improve pharmacy access and expand the provision of pharmacy services in minority neighborhoods are critical.