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.

Patient-Provider Discussion About Lung Cancer Screening by Race and Ethnicity: Implications for Equitable Uptake of Lung Cancer Screening.

BACKGROUND: Physician-patient discussions regarding lung cancer screening (LCS) are uncommon and its racial and ethnic disparities are under-investigated. We examined the racial and ethnic disparities in the trends and frequency of LCS discussion among the LCS-eligible United States (US) population. METHODS: We analyzed data from the Health Information National Trends Survey from 2014 to 2020. LCS-eligible individuals were defined as adults aged 55 to 80 years old who have a current or former smoking history. We estimated the trends and frequency of LCS discussions and adjusted the probability of having an LCS discussion by racial and ethnic groups. RESULTS: Among 2136 LCS-eligible participants (representing 22.7 million US adults), 12.9% (95% CI, 10.9%-15%) reported discussing LCS with their providers in the past year. The frequency of LCS discussion was lowest among non-Hispanic White participants (12.3%, 95% CI, 9.9%-14.7%) compared to other racial and ethnic groups (14.1% in Hispanic to 15.3% in non-Hispanic Black). A significant increase over time was only observed among non-Hispanic Black participants (10.1% in 2014 to 22.1% in 2020; P = .05) and non-Hispanic Whites (8.5% in 2014 to 14% in 2020; P = .02). In adjusted analyses, non-Hispanic Black participants (14.6%, 95% CI, 12.3%-16.7%) had a significantly higher probability of LCS discussion than non-Hispanic Whites (12.1%, 95% CI, 11.4%-12.7%). CONCLUSION: Patient-provider LCS discussion was uncommon in the LCS-eligible US population. Non-Hispanic Black individuals were more likely to have LCS discussions than other racial and ethnic groups. There is a need for more research to clarify the discordance between LCS discussions and the actual screening uptake in this population.

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.

Allostatic load and risk of all-cause, cancer-specific, and cardiovascular mortality in older cancer survivors: an analysis of the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey 1999-2010.

Background: Allostatic load has been linked to an increased risk of death in various populations. However, to date, there is no research specifically investigating the effect of allostatic load on mortality in older cancer survivors. Aims: To investigate the association between allostatic load (AL) and mortality in older cancer survivors. Method: A total of 1,291 adults aged 60 years or older who survived for ≥1 year since cancer diagnoses were identified from the 1999-2010 National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey. AL was the exposure of interest incorporating 9 clinical measures/biomarkers; one point was added to AL if any of the measures/biomarkers exceeded the normal level. The sum of points was categorized as an ordinal variable to reflect low, moderate, and high AL. Our outcomes of interest were all-cause, cancer-specific, and cardiovascular disease (CVD)-specific mortality. Death was identified by linkage to the National Death Index. Multivariable Cox proportional hazards models were used to estimate adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) of mortality by AL category. Results: Overall, 53.6% of participants were male and 78.4% were white. The mean age of study participants at interview was 72.8 years (SD=7.1). A total of 546 participants died during the follow-up (median follow-up time: 8.0 years). Among them, 158 died of cancer and 106 died of cardiovascular events. Results from multivariable Cox proportional hazards models showed that higher ALS was positively associated with higher all-cause mortality (ALS=4-9 vs. ALS =0-1: aHR=1.52, 95% CI =1.17-1.98, p-trend<0.01) and higher cancer-specific mortality (ALS=4-9 vs. ALS =0-1: aHR=1.80, 95% CI =1.12-2.90, p-trend=0.01). The association between ALS and cardiovascular mortality was positive but non-significant (ALS=4-9 vs. ALS =0-1: aHR=1.59, 95% CI =0.86-2.94, p-trend=0.11). Conclusions: Our study suggests that older cancer survivors can have a higher risk of death if they have a high burden of AL.

Survival Differences by Comorbidity Burden among Patients with Stage I/II Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer after Thoracoscopic Resection.

We sought to compare overall survival (OS) by comorbidity burden among patients with stage I/II non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) who received thoracoscopic resection. Utilizing data from the National Cancer Database, we conducted a survival analysis among patients aged 50+ with stage I/II NSCLC who received thoracoscopic resection between 2010 and 2017. The comorbidity burden was measured by the Charlson comorbidity index (CCI, 0, 1, 2+). Multivariable Cox proportional hazard models were used to compare overall survival relative to the CCI (CCI of 0 as the referent). Subgroup analyses were conducted considering sex, age groups, days from diagnosis to surgery, facility type, laterality, and type of surgery. For this study, 61,760 patients were included, with a mean age of 69.1 years (SD: 8.5). Notably, 51.2% had a CCI of 0, 31.8% had a CCI of 1, and 17.0% had a CCI of 2+. Most participants were non-Hispanic White (87.5%), and 56.9% were female. We found that an increase in the CCI was associated with a higher risk of all-cause mortality (CCI 1 vs. 0 aHR: 1.24, 95% CI: 1.20-1.28; CCI 2+ vs. 0 aHR: 1.51, 95% CI: 1.45-1.57; p-trend < 0.01). Our subgroup analysis according to sex suggested that the association between CCI and risk of death was stronger in women.

Associations of Total Body Fat Mass and Skeletal Muscle Index with All-Cause and Cancer-Specific Mortality in Cancer Survivors.

Purpose: The importance of body composition on cancer outcomes is of great clinical interest. Measures of body composition that differentiate fat mass from skeletal muscle mass can help redefine our understanding of body composition for cancer survival. We investigated whether the risk of all-cause and cancer-specific mortality differ by levels of total fat mass and sarcopenia status in cancer survivors. Our secondary aim was a subgroup analysis assessing the role of race within these associations. Methods: Participants included 1682 adult cancer survivors who had undergone a dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) examination to measure body composition, from the 1999-2006 and 2011-2018 National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES). Total fat mass was categorized into tertiles (we assessed high vs. low tertiles), and sarcopenia was considered as having an appendicular skeletal muscle mass index less than 7.26 kg/m2 for males and less than 5.45 kg/m2 for females. Multivariable Cox proportional hazard models estimated the adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) and 95% confidence interval (CI). Results: The mean age of study participants was 61.9 years, and they were followed up for an average of 9.67 years. The prevalence of sarcopenia was 25.0% (N = 304), and 33.4% (N = 561) had a high total fat mass. Participants with a higher fat mass (aHR = 1.30, 95% CI = 1.06-1.61) and with sarcopenia (aHR = 1.51, 95% CI = 1.22-1.88) had a 30% and 51% increased risk of all-cause mortality compared to participants with a low fat mass and with no sarcopenia, respectively. Further, sarcopenia (aHR = 1.74, 95% CI = 1.23-2.29) was associated with a higher risk of cancer-specific mortality in cancer survivors. The association between sarcopenia and all-cause mortality was twice as strong in Black people (aHR = 2.99, 95% CI = 1.39-6.06) compared to White people (aHR = 1.53, 95% CI = 1.19-1.95). Conclusions: Our findings show the opposing relations of fat mass and appendicular skeletal muscle mass index with mortality in a national sample of cancer survivors, and that the relationships may differ by race. These results emphasize the importance of maintaining a healthy body composition among cancer survivors.

Low muscle mass is associated with a higher risk of all-cause and cardiovascular disease-specific mortality in cancer survivors.

OBJECTIVES: Individuals with prior cancer diagnosis are more likely to have low muscle mass (LMM) than their cancer-free counterparts. Understanding the effects of LMM on the prognosis of cancer survivors can be clinically important. The aim of this study was to investigate whether risks for all-cause and cardiovascular disease (CVD)-specific mortality differ by status of LMM in cancer survivors and a matched cohort without cancer history. METHODS: We used cohort data from the 1999-2006 and 2011-2014 National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey. Participants included 946 adults surviving for ≥1 since cancer diagnosis and a matched cohort (by age, sex, and race) without cancer history (N = 1857). LMM was defined by appendicular lean mass and body height (men <7.26 kg/m2, women <5.45 kg/m2). Death was ascertained via the National Death Index and cause of death was assessed via International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision. Multivariable Cox proportional hazards models were used to estimate adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) of LMM. RESULTS: The mean age of cancer survivors and matched cohort was 60.6 y (SD 15) and 60.2 y (SD 14.9), respectively. The median follow-up was 10.5 y for survivors and 10.9 y for matched cohort. Overall, 22.2% of cancer survivors and 19.7% of the matched cohort had LMM, respectively. In all, 321 survivors (33.9%) and 495 participants (26.7%) in the matched cohort died during follow-up. CVD-specific deaths were identified in 58 survivors (6.1%) and 122 participants in the matched cohort (6.6%). The multivariable Cox model suggested that LMM was positively associated with all-cause (aHR, 1.73; 95% CI, 1.31-2.29) and CVD-specific (aHR, 2.13; 95% CI, 1.14-4.00) mortality in cancer survivors. The associations between LMM and risk for all-cause (aHR, 1.24; 95% CI, 0.98-1.56) and CVD-specific (aHR, 1.21; 95% CI, 0.75-1.93) mortality were not statistically significant in the matched cohort. CONCLUSION: Cancer survivors with LMM have an increased risk for all-cause and CVD-specific mortality. This increase appears to be larger than that in counterparts without cancer history.

Personalised Lung Cancer Screening (PLuS) study to assess the importance of coexisting chronic conditions to clinical practice and policy: protocol for a multicentre observational study.

INTRODUCTION: Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer death in the USA and worldwide, and lung cancer screening (LCS) with low-dose CT (LDCT) has the potential to improve lung cancer outcomes. A critical question is whether the ratio of potential benefits to harms found in prior LCS trials applies to an older and potentially sicker population. The Personalised Lung Cancer Screening (PLuS) study will help close this knowledge gap by leveraging real-world data to fully characterise LCS recipients. The principal goal of the PLuS study is to characterise the comorbidity burden of individuals undergoing LCS and quantify the benefits and harms of LCS to enable informed decision-making. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: PLuS is a multicentre observational study designed to assemble an LCS cohort from the electronic health records of ~40 000 individuals undergoing annual LCS with LDCT from 2016 to 2022. Data will be integrated into a unified repository to (1) examine the burden of multimorbidity by race/ethnicity, socioeconomic status and age; (2) quantify potential benefits and harms; and (3) use the observational data with validated simulation models in the Cancer Intervention and Surveillance Modeling Network (CISNET) to provide LCS outcomes in the real-world US population. We will fit a multivariable logistic regression model to estimate the adjusted ORs of comorbidity, functional limitations and impaired pulmonary function adjusted for relevant covariates. We will also estimate the cumulative risk of LCS outcomes using discrete-time survival models. To our knowledge, this is the first study to combine observational data and simulation models to estimate the long-term impact of LCS with LDCT. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study was approved by the Kaiser Permanente Southern California Institutional Review Board and VA Portland Health Care System. The results will be disseminated through publications and presentations at national and international conferences. Safety considerations include protection of patient confidentiality.

Cancer risk perception predictors for total body skin examinations: a cross-sectional study using Health Information National Trends Survey (HINTS) 2017 data.

BACKGROUND: Despite the lack of national skin cancer screening recommendations, a total body skin examination by a healthcare provider may detect skin cancer earlier, allowing for more effective treatment and better outcomes. OBJECTIVE: Examine prevalence, demographic, and cancer risk perceptions of adults who have had a skin examination performed by a healthcare provider. METHODS: Retrospective, cross-sectional analysis of a nationally representative sample of U.S. adults using the Health Information National Trends Survey (HINTS). Logistic regressions were performed to identify associations between having a skin examination, risk perceptions, and demographic variables. RESULTS: Approximately 46% of the sample reported having a skin examination. Females, college graduates, those with a history of skin cancer, people who check their skin for signs of skin cancer, and adults over the age of 45 were more likely to have a skin examination. The people least likely to be screened were those not wanting to know their chances of getting cancer. LIMITATIONS: HINTS is a cross-sectional survey which provides only a glimpse of predictors. CONCLUSIONS: The findings are consistent with other studies that people sometimes avoid cancer risk information. An educational intervention focused on the benefits of early cancer detection would benefit people who report not wanting to know their chances of getting cancer.

CBD (Cannabidiol) Product Attitudes, Knowledge, and Use Among Young Adults.

Background: Cannabidiol (CBD), a non-psychoactive component of cannabis is marketed as a potential treatment for many conditions and widely available to purchase as a dietary supplement. In 2017, sales of CBD exceeded 820 million dollars despite many unconfirmed health claims, murky legality, and limited product efficacy and safety testing.Purpose/Objectives: This study aims to explore cannabidiol (CBD) knowledge, attitudes, and use among young adults.Methods: The anonymous 36-item survey developed using Qualtrics was distributed via social media from November 2018 to January 2019 with 340 respondents.Results: Of the 340 respondents, 242 reported they had heard of CBD, and 135 reported using CBD products. CBD users were primarily white, female, without children, made less than $25,000 per year, and unmarried. Most commonly used CBD products were edibles (56.30%), tinctures (54.07%), and vape (38.52%). Top reasons for use included stress relief (65.39%), relaxation (54.81%), and sleep improvement (42.22%). Many respondents reported using guesswork to determine dosage, and over half of respondents reported at least one unanticipated side effect.Conclusions/Importance: This study revealed that many users are not responsibly using CBD products, many believe CBD products provide health benefits that are not yet scientifically proven, and they are not knowledgeable about legal and regulatory issues. Until CBD use is more thoroughly researched and has more comprehensive regulation, public health professionals should address alternative stress and anxiety treatment methods.