RESUMEN
Background. Despite the potential of palliative care (PC) to enhance the quality of life for patients with advanced dementia, there is limited knowledge of its inpatient utilization patterns. This study investigated inpatient PC consultation utilization patterns and evaluated its impact on hospital length of stay (LOS) and medical costs among older patients diagnosed with Alzheimer's Disease and Related Dementia who were at a high risk of mortality (ADRD-HRM). Methods. Using the 2016-2019 National Inpatient Sample database, we conducted multivariable logistic regression analyses to identify individual and hospital characteristics influencing PC consultation utilization. We subsequently performed generalized linear models to estimate LOS (using Poisson distribution) and hospital charges (via log-transformation). Results. Our sample encompassed 965,644 hospital discharges (weighted n = 4,828,219) of patients aged 65 years and above with ADRD-HRM. Among them, 14.6% received inpatient PC. There was a notable uptrend in PC consultation utilization from 13.3% in 2016 to 16.3% in 2019 (p trend<.001). Factors positively influencing and associated with PC utilization included patients that are older, non-Hispanic White, with higher income, receiving care from teaching hospitals, and facilitated with greater bed capacity (all P < .05). Although patients who received PC were more likely to have 3.0% longer LOS (P < .001), they had 19.2% lower hospital charges (P < .001). Conclusions. PC substantially reduced hospital expenditures for older patients with ADRD-HRM, but the prevalence remained low at 14.6% in the study period. Future studies should explore the unmet needs of patients with lower sociodemographic status and those in rural hospitals to further increase their PC consultation utilization.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Despite numerous studies on racial/ethnic disparities among patients with breast cancer, there is a paucity of literature evaluating racial/ethnic differences in 21-gene recurrence score (RS) and survival differences stratified by RS risk categories. We thus performed an observational cohort study to examine racial/ethnic disparities in the context of RS. METHODS: The National Cancer Database (NCDB) was queried for female patients diagnosed between 2006 and 2018 with estrogen receptor (ER)-positive, pT1-3N0-1aM0 breast cancer who received surgery followed by adjuvant endocrine therapy and had RS data available. Logistic multivariable analysis (MVA) was built to evaluate variables associated with RS ≥ 26. Cox MVA was used to evaluate OS. Subgroup analyses were performed to compare the magnitude of racial/ethnic differences stratified by RS. P values less than 0.017 were considered statistically significant based on Bonferroni correction. RESULTS: A total of 140,133 women were included for analysis. Of these, 115,651 (82.5%), 8,213 (5.9%), 10,814 (7.7%), and 5,455 (3.9%) were NHW, Hispanic, Black, and API women, respectively. Median (IQR) follow up was 66.2 months (48.0-89.8). Logistic MVA showed that, compared with NHW women, Black women were associated with higher RS (≥ 26 vs < 26: adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 1.19, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.12-1.26, p < 0.001), while HW (aOR 0.93, 95% CI 0.86-1.00, p = 0.04) and API women (aOR 1.03, 95% CI 0.95-1.13, p = 0.45) were not. Cox MVA showed that, compared with NHW women, Black women had worse OS (adjusted hazards ratio [aHR] 1.10, 95% CI 1.02-1.19, p = 0.012), while HW (aHR 0.85, 95% CI 0.77-0.94, p = 0.001) and API (aHR 0.66, 95% CI 0.56-0.77, p < 0.001) women had better OS. In subgroup analysis, similar findings were noted among those with RS < 26, while only API women were associated with improved OS among others with RS ≥ 26. CONCLUSION: To our knowledge, this is the largest study using nationwide oncology database to suggest that Black women were associated with higher RS, while HW and API women were not. It also suggested that Black women were associated with worse OS among those with RS < 26, while API women were associated with improved OS regardless of RS when compared to NHW women.
Asunto(s)
Neoplasias de la Mama , Femenino , Humanos , Adyuvantes Inmunológicos , Población Negra , Neoplasias de la Mama/genética , Receptores de Estrógenos/genética , Hispánicos o Latinos , Negro o Afroamericano , Blanco , Asiático Americano Nativo Hawáiano y de las Islas del PacíficoRESUMEN
Cancer is the leading cause of illness-related death in state prisons in the United States. The experiences of physicians providing oncological care to individuals experiencing incarceration are underexplored. The study aims were to evaluate knowledge, attitudes, and practices of oncologists caring for cancer patients who are incarcerated. An online survey was distributed to a random sample of 150 oncologists from the American Society of Clinical Oncology and the American Society for Radiation Oncology from July 2020 to December 2021. Statistical analyses included two proportion Z-test, Fisher's exact test, Kruskal-Wallis test, and Cramer's V to estimate factors associated with attitudes and barriers to care. Of the 55 respondents (36.7% response rate), 21 were medical oncologists and 34 were radiation oncologists. Academic center oncologists were more likely to report caring for incarcerated patients than community or private practice oncologists (p = .04). Most (53%) incorrectly reported "heart disease" as the leading cause of death, as opposed to "cancer" (15% identified correctly). Oncologists practicing at both academic and community centers were more likely to report care coordination barriers than oncologists at academic or community centers (p < .01). We identified potential barriers in caring for incarcerated cancer patients. Future studies should explore ways to improve care coordination between oncology teams and prisons.
Asunto(s)
Neoplasias , Oncólogos , Humanos , Estados Unidos , Conocimientos, Actitudes y Práctica en Salud , Encarcelamiento , Actitud del Personal de Salud , Neoplasias/terapia , Encuestas y CuestionariosRESUMEN
Purpose: Male breast cancer treatment involves multimodality therapy, including radiation therapy; nevertheless, few men have received proton therapy (PT) for it. Further, heart disease is an established leading cause of death in men, and radiation therapy heart dose correlates with cardiac toxicity, highlighting the need for cardiac-sparing radiation techniques. Thus, we provide a descriptive analysis of PT in a male breast cancer cohort. Patients and Methods: Men who received PT for localized breast cancer between 2012 and 2022 were identified from a prospective database. Toxicities were prospectively recorded by using the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE), version 4.0. Results: Five male patients were identified. All had estrogen receptor (ER)-positive, Her2neu-negative disease and received adjuvant endocrine therapy. One had genetic testing positive for BRCA2, one had a variant of unknown significance (VUS) in the APC gene, and one had a VUS in MSH2. Median age was 73 years (range, 41-80). Baseline comorbidities included obesity (n = 1), diabetes (n = 1), hypertension (n = 4), history of deep vein thrombosis (n = 1), personal history of myocardial infarction (n = 3; 1 with a pacemaker), and a history of lung cancer (n = 1). All received PT to the left chest wall and comprehensive regional lymphatics. One received passive-scattering PT, and 4 received pencil beam scanning. One patient received a boost to the mastectomy incision via electrons. Median heart dose was 1 GyRBE (range, 0-1.0), median 0.1-cm3 dose to the left anterior descending artery was 7.5 GyRBE (range, 0-14.2), and median follow-up was 2 years (range, 0.75-6.5); no patient experienced a new cardiac event, and all remain free from breast cancer recurrence and progression. Conclusion: In a small case series for a rare diagnosis, PT to the chest wall and regional lymphatics, including internal mammary nodes, resulted in low cardiac exposure, high local regional disease control rates, and minimal toxicity. Proton therapy should be considered for treating men with breast cancer to achieve cardiac sparing.
RESUMEN
PURPOSE: Despite the disproportionately high risk of breast cancer among women of African heritage, little is known about the facilitators and barriers to implementing germline genetic testing and counseling (GT/C). METHODS: This scoping review followed guidelines recommended by the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for scoping reviews. Published manuscripts from database inception through 2021 were sourced from PubMed, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature via EBSCO, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Scopus. Search terms were used to retrieve articles addressing (1) African heritage, (2) breast cancer, and (3) GT or GC. The screening involved abstract and title review and full-text review. Data were extracted for all articles meeting the inclusion criteria. RESULTS: A total of 154 studies were included. Most studies that took place were conducted in the United States (71.4%), and most first authors (76.9%) were from the United States. GT was conducted in 73 (49.7%) studies. BRCA1/BRCA2 were the most commonly studied genes for germline mutations. GC was conducted in 49 studies (33.3%), and perspectives on GC were evaluated in 43 (29.3%). The use of racial/ethnic categories varied broadly, although African American was most common (40.1%). Racism was mentioned in three studies (2.0%). CONCLUSION: There is a growing body of literature on GT/C for breast cancer in women of African heritage. Future studies on GT/C of African populations should consider increased clarity around racial/ethnic categorizations, continued community engagement, and intentional processes for informed consent.
Asunto(s)
Neoplasias de la Mama , Femenino , Humanos , Neoplasias de la Mama/diagnóstico , Neoplasias de la Mama/genética , Etnicidad , Asesoramiento Genético , Pruebas Genéticas , Estados UnidosRESUMEN
PURPOSE: The COVID-19 pandemic has profoundly affected cancer care worldwide, including radiation therapy (RT) for breast cancer (BC), because of risk-based resource allocation. We report the evolution of international breast RT practices during the beginning of the pandemic, focusing on differences in treatment recommendations between countries. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Between July and November 2020, a 58-question survey was distributed to radiation oncologists (ROs) through international professional societies. Changes in RT decision making during the first surge of the pandemic were evaluated across six hypothetical scenarios, including the management of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS), early-stage, locally advanced, and metastatic BC. The significance of changes in responses before and during the pandemic was examined using chi-square and McNemar-Bowker tests. RESULTS: One thousand one hundred three ROs from 54 countries completed the survey. Incomplete responses (254) were excluded from the analysis. Most respondents were from the United States (285), Japan (117), Italy (63), Canada (58), and Brazil (56). Twenty-one percent (230) of respondents reported treating at least one patient with BC who was COVID-19-positive. Approximately 60% of respondents reported no change in treatment recommendation during the pandemic, except for patients with metastatic disease, for which 57.7% (636/1,103; P < .0005) changed their palliative practice. Among respondents who noted a change in their recommendation during the first surge of the pandemic, omitting, delaying, and adopting short-course RT were the most frequent changes, with most transitioning to moderate hypofractionation for DCIS and early-stage BC. CONCLUSION: Early in the COVID-19 pandemic, significant changes in global RT practice patterns for BC were introduced. The impact of published results from the FAST FORWARD trial supporting ultrahypofractionation likely confounded the interpretation of the pandemic's independent influence on RT delivery.
Asunto(s)
Neoplasias de la Mama , COVID-19 , Carcinoma Intraductal no Infiltrante , Oncología por Radiación , Humanos , Estados Unidos , Femenino , COVID-19/epidemiología , Pandemias , Especies Reactivas de Oxígeno , Encuestas y Cuestionarios , Neoplasias de la Mama/radioterapiaRESUMEN
PURPOSE: The potential disparities in palliative care delivery for underrepresented minorities with breast cancer are not well known. We sought to determine whether race and ethnicity impact the receipt of palliative care for patients with metastatic breast cancer (MBC). METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed the National Cancer Database for female patients diagnosed with stage IV breast cancer between 2010 and 2017 who received palliative care following diagnosis of MBC to assess the proportion of patients who received palliative care, including non-curative-intent local-regional or systemic therapy. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was performed to identify variables associated with receiving palliative care. RESULTS: 60,685 patients were diagnosed with de novo MBC. Of these, only 21.4% (n = 12,963) received a palliative care service. Overall, there was a positive trend in palliative care receipt from 18.2% in 2010 to 23.0% in 2017 (P < 0.001), which persisted when stratified by race and ethnicity. Relative to non-Hispanic White women, Asian/Pacific Islander women (aOR 0.80, 95% CI 0.71-0.90, P < 0.001), Hispanic women (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 0.69, 95% CI 0.63-0.76, P < 0.001), and non-Hispanic Black women (aOR 0.94, 95% CI 0.88-0.99, P = 0.03) were less likely to receive palliative care. CONCLUSIONS: Fewer than 25% of women with MBC received palliative care between 2010 and 2017. While palliative care has significantly increased for all racial/ethnic groups, Hispanic White, Black, and Asian/Pacific Islander women with MBC still receive significantly less palliative care than non-Hispanic White women. Further research is needed to identify the socioeconomic and cultural barriers to palliative care utilization.
Asunto(s)
Neoplasias de la Mama , Disparidades en Atención de Salud , Cuidados Paliativos , Femenino , Humanos , Neoplasias de la Mama/epidemiología , Neoplasias de la Mama/etnología , Neoplasias de la Mama/secundario , Neoplasias de la Mama/terapia , Etnicidad , Disparidades en Atención de Salud/etnología , Disparidades en Atención de Salud/estadística & datos numéricos , Hispánicos o Latinos/estadística & datos numéricos , Cuidados Paliativos/normas , Cuidados Paliativos/estadística & datos numéricos , Estudios Retrospectivos , Estados Unidos/epidemiología , Blanco/estadística & datos numéricos , Asiático Americano Nativo Hawáiano y de las Islas del Pacífico/estadística & datos numéricos , Negro o Afroamericano/estadística & datos numéricosRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Cancer incidence among individuals with incarceration exposure has been rarely studied due to the absence of linked datasets. This study examined cancer incidence during incarceration and postincarceration compared to the general population using a statewide linked cohort. METHODS: We constructed a retrospective cohort from a linkage of state tumor registry and correctional system data for Connecticut residents from 2005 to 2016, and identified cancers diagnosed during and within 12 months postincarceration. We estimated incidence rates (including for screen-detectable cancers) and calculated the standardized incidence ratios (SIR) for the incarcerated and recently released populations, relative to the general population. We also examined cancer incidence by race and ethnicity within each group. RESULTS: Cancer incidence was lower in incarcerated individuals (SIR = 0.64, 95% CI 0.56-0.72), but higher in recently released individuals (SIR = 1.34, 95% CI 1.23-1.47) compared with the general population, and across all race and ethnic strata. Similarly, nonscreen-detectable cancer incidence was lower in incarcerated and higher in recently released populations compared to the general population. However, non-Hispanic Black individuals had elevated incidence of screen-detectable cancers compared with non-Hispanic White individuals across all three populations (incarcerated, SIR = 1.66, 95% CI 1.03-2.53; recently released, SIR = 1.83, 95% CI 1.32-2.47; and general population, SIR = 1.18, 95% CI 1.16-1.21). CONCLUSION: Compared with the general population, incarcerated persons have a lower cancer incidence, whereas recently released persons have a higher cancer incidence. Irrespective of incarceration status, non-Hispanic Black individuals have a higher incidence of screen-detectable cancers compared with non-Hispanic White individuals. Supplemental studies examining cancer screening and diagnoses during incarceration are needed to discern the reasons for observed disparities in incidence.
Asunto(s)
Neoplasias , Prisioneros , Humanos , Estudios Retrospectivos , Incidencia , Neoplasias/epidemiología , EtnicidadRESUMEN
Purpose: To determine the rib fracture rate in a cohort of patients with breast cancer treated with proton therapy. Patient and Methods: From a prospective database, we identified 225 patients treated with proton therapy between 2012 and 2020 (223 women; 2 men). Clinical and dosimetric data were extracted, the cumulative incidence method assessed rib fracture rate, and Fine-Gray tests assessed prognostic significance of select variables. In-field rib fracture was defined as a fracture that occurred in a rib located within the 10% isodose line. Out-of-field rib fracture was defined as a fracture occurring in a rib location outside of the 10% isodose line. Results: Of the patients, 74% had left-sided breast cancer; 5%, bilateral; and 21%, right-sided. Dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry scans showed normality in 20%, osteopenia in 34%, and osteoporosis in 6% (test not performed in 40%). Additionally, 57% received an aromatase inhibitor. Target volumes were breast ± internal mammary nodes (IMNs) (16%), breast and comprehensive regional lymphatics (32%), chest wall ± IMNs (1%), and chest wall/comprehensive regional lymphatics (51%). Passive-scattered proton therapy was used for 41% of patients, 58% underwent pencil-beam scanning (PBS), and 1% underwent a combination (passive scattering/PBS), with 85% of patients receiving a boost. Median follow-up was 3.1 years, with 97% having >12-month follow-up. The 3-year cumulative in-field rib fracture incidence was 3.7%. Eight patients developed in-field rib fractures (1 symptomatic, 7 imaging identified) for a 0.4% symptomatic rib fracture rate. Median time from radiation completion to rib fracture identification was 1.8 years (fractures were identified within 2.2 years for 7 of 8 patients). No variables were associated with rib fracture on univariate analysis. Three fractures developed outside the radiation field (0.9% cumulative incidence of out-of-field rib fracture). Conclusion: In this series of patients with breast cancer treated with proton therapy, the 3-year rib fracture rates remain low (in-field 3.7%; symptomatic 0.4%). As in photon therapy, the asymptomatic rate may be underestimated owing to a lack of routine surveillance imaging. However, patients experiencing symptomatic rib fractures after proton therapy for breast cancer are rare.
RESUMEN
Purpose: Treatment for bilateral breast cancer with radiation therapy is technically challenging. We evaluated the clinical and dosimetric outcomes of a small series of patients with synchronous bilateral breast cancer, including a photon dosimetric comparison, to identify optimal treatment planning approaches. Materials and Methods: We reviewed a registry of patients (simultaneously) diagnosed with synchronous bilateral breast cancers who underwent postoperative definitive adjuvant proton therapy at our institution between 2012 and 2021. All patients were treated with double-scattered proton or pencil-beam scanning therapies. For comparison, intensity-modulated radiation therapy photon plans optimized for organ sparing and coverage were generated after treatment. Results: Six patients were included. The median patient age was 66 years; all were female with no history of breast cancer or radiation therapy. Two (33%) patients received breast/chest wall-only treatments, 1 (17%) required breast plus level I axillary treatment to one side and breast plus regional nodal irradiation (RNI) to the other, and 3 (50%) received bilateral breast/chest plus RNI; dosimetric results are reported for each group's median. Analysis showed clinical target coverage was comparable between proton and photon techniques (V95% of 96.4% with proton, 97.8% with photon). However, protons could deliver superior organ sparing at clinically relevant dose metrics for virtually all structures: a 6.7 Gy absolute reduction in the mean heart dose (7.5 Gy with photons to 0.7 Gy with protons), a 47% to 57% relative reduction in D0.1cm3 to coronary arteries, a 54% relative reduction in lung V20 Gy, and an absolute 7.6 Gy reduction to the brachial plexus. There was also greater esophagus and spinal cord sparing. The overall survival rate was 100% at 1.5 years of median follow-up (0.5-4.9), and all patients were free of disease. For toxicity, all patients had some form of acute side effects: 66% experienced grade 2 breast/chest pain or soreness; 100% had grade 2 radiation dermatitis or skin induration; 33% had grade 2 fatigue; and 17% had grade 2 esophagitis (per the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events [CTCAE] version 5.0; US National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Maryland). Subacute toxicity (within 6 months) was observed for 17% of patients with delayed onset of grade 3 dermatitis in the setting of preexisting lupus, 17% with a delayed surgical wound complication, and 17% with grade 2 soft tissue fibrosis. No grade 4 or 5 events were observed. Conclusions: Substantial dose reductions to multiple organs at risk while maintaining target coverage make proton the preferred modality for bilateral breast cancer treatment when available.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Progesterone receptor (PR)-negative tumors have been shown to have worse prognosis and were underrepresented in recent trials on patients with estrogen receptor (ER)-positive breast cancer. The role of PR-negative status in the context of 21-gene recurrence score (RS) and nodal staging remains unclear. METHODS: The National Cancer Database (NCDB) was queried for women diagnosed between 2010 and 2017 with ER-positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-negative, pT1-3N0-1a breast cancer. Logistic and Cox multivariable analyses (MVA) were performed to identify association of PR status with high RS (> 25) and overall survival (OS), respectively. RESULTS: Among 143,828 women, 130,349 (90.6%) and 13,479 (9.4%) patients had PR-positive and PR-negative tumors, respectively. Logistic MVA showed that PR-negative status was associated with higher RS (> 25: aOR 16.15, 95% CI 15.23-17.13). Cox MVA showed that PR-negative status was associated with worse OS (adjusted hazards ratio [aHR] 1.20, 95% CI 1.10-1.31). There was an interaction with nodal staging and chemotherapy (p = 0.049). Subgroup analyses using Cox MVA showed the magnitude of the chemotherapy benefit was greater among those with pN1a, PR-negative tumors than pN1a, PR-positive tumors (PR-positive: aHR 0.57, 95% CI 0.47-0.67; PR-negative: aHR 0.31, 95% CI 0.20-0.47). It was comparable among those with pN0 tumors regardless of PR status (PR-positive: aHR 0.74, 95% CI 0.66-0.82; PR-negative: aHR 0.63, 95% CI 0.51-0.77). CONCLUSION: PR-negative tumors were independently correlated with higher RS and were associated with greater OS benefits from chemotherapy for pN1a tumors, but not pN0 tumors.
Asunto(s)
Neoplasias de la Mama , Humanos , Femenino , Neoplasias de la Mama/patología , Receptores de Estrógenos/metabolismo , Receptores de Progesterona/metabolismo , Estadificación de Neoplasias , PronósticoRESUMEN
Importance: While low income has been associated with a higher incidence of triple-negative breast cancer, its association with 21-gene recurrence score (RS) among patients with estrogen receptor (ER)-positive breast cancer remains unclear. Objective: To evaluate the association of household income with RS and overall survival (OS) among patients with ER-positive breast cancer. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study used data from the National Cancer Database. Eligible participants included women diagnosed between 2010 and 2018 with ER-positive, pT1-3N0-1aM0 breast cancer who received surgery followed by adjuvant endocrine therapy with or without chemotherapy. Data analysis was performed from July 2022 to September 2022. Exposures: Low vs high neighborhood-level household income levels defined as below vs above the median household income of $50â¯353 based on each patient's zip code. Main Outcomes and Measures: RS (a score ranged from 0 to 100 based on gene expression signatures indicating the risk of distant metastasis, with RS of 25 or below indicating non-high risk and RS above 25 indicating high risk) and OS. Results: Among 119â¯478 women (median [IQR] age, 60 [52-67] years; 4737 [4.0%] Asian and Pacific Islander, 9226 [7.7%] Black, 7245 [6.1%] Hispanic, 98â¯270 [82.2%] non-Hispanic White), 82â¯198 (68.8%) and 37â¯280 (31.2%) patients had high and low income, respectively. Logistic multivariable analysis (MVA) showed that, compared with high income, low income was associated with higher RS (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 1.11; 95% CI, 1.06-1.16). Cox MVA showed that low income was also associated with worse OS (adjusted hazards ratio [aHR], 1.18; 95% CI, 1.11-1.25). Interaction term analysis showed a statistically significant interaction between income levels and RS (interaction P < .001). On subgroup analysis, significant findings were noted among those with RS below 26 (aHR, 1.21; 95% CI, 1.13-1.29), while there was no significant OS difference between income levels among others with RS of 26 or higher (aHR, 1.08; 95% CI, 0.96-1.22). Conclusions and Relevance: Our study suggested that low household income was independently associated with higher 21-gene recurrence scores and significantly worse survival outcomes among those with scores below 26, but not 26 or higher. Further studies are warranted to investigate the association between socioeconomic determinants of health and intrinsic tumor biology among patients with breast cancer.
Asunto(s)
Receptores de Estrógenos , Neoplasias de la Mama Triple Negativas , Femenino , Humanos , Persona de Mediana Edad , Estudios de Cohortes , Terapia Combinada , Receptores de Estrógenos/análisis , Transcriptoma , AncianoRESUMEN
PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to investigate United States (US) radiation oncology (RO) program directors' (PDs) attitudes and practices regarding racial/ethnic diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) to better understand potential effects on underrepresented in medicine (UIM) residents in RO. METHODS AND MATERIALS: A 28-item survey was developed using the validated Ethnic Harassment Experiences Scale and the Daily Life Experiences subscale, as well as input from DEI leaders in RO. The survey was institutional review board-approved and administered to RO PDs. PDs were provided with the American Association of Medical Colleges definition of UIM, that is, "Underrepresented in medicine means those racial and ethnic populations that are underrepresented in the medical profession relative to their numbers in the general population." Descriptive statistics were used in analysis. RESULTS: The response rate was 71% (64/90). Institutional Culture and Beliefs: 42% responded that they had a department DEI director. A minority (17%, nâ¯=â¯11) agreed "I believe that people from UIM backgrounds have equal access to quality tertiary education in the US." The majority (97%, nâ¯=â¯62) agreed "My program values residents from UIM backgrounds." Support and Resources: The majority (78%, nâ¯=â¯50) agreed "My program has resources in place to assist/provide support for resident physicians from UIM backgrounds." Interview and Recruitment: Most PDs (53%) had not taken part in activities aimed at recruiting UIM residents and 17% had interviewed no UIM applicants in the past 5 years for residency. Resident Experiences of Racism: 17% (nâ¯=â¯11) agreed "UIM residents in my program have reported incidents of racism to me," and 28% (nâ¯=â¯18) agreed "I believe that UIM residents in my program have been treated differently because of their race/ethnicity by faculty, staff, coresidents or patients." CONCLUSIONS: Most PDs reported that they did not believe that UIM residents were treated differently in their department because of their race/ethnicity, and only a minority had received reports of racial discrimination experienced by residents. These data contrast resident experiences and suggest a disconnect between DEI perceptions and resident experiences among US RO PDs that should be addressed through increased programmatic action and evaluation.
Asunto(s)
Internado y Residencia , Medicina , Oncología por Radiación , Humanos , Estados Unidos , Oncología por Radiación/educación , Actitud , Grupos MinoritariosRESUMEN
INTRODUCTION: There is a dearth of data on cancer care in the incarcerated population, despite being the leading cause of illness-related death in United states' prisons. We retrospectively reviewed the demographic and clinicopathologic characteristics of incarcerated individuals who received radiation therapy at a large safety-net hospital. METHODS: Following IRB approval, we identified 80 incarcerated patients who presented for radiation therapy between January 2003 and May 2019. Descriptive statistics on the patients, tumor types and stage, treatment factors, and follow-up rates were analyzed. RESULTS: 80 individuals with 82 cancer diagnoses presented for radiation oncology consultation over the study period. The median age was 54 years (range, 46-64). Patients of White, Black, and "other" races comprised 61.3% (n=49), 28.8% (n=23), and 10% (n=8), respectively. Most patients were male (n=75, 93.8%) and English speakers (n=76, 95%). Moreover, 50% (n=40) had a substance use disorder history and 75% (n=60) had a smoking history. The three most common cancer types were prostate (n=12, 14.6%), gastrointestinal (n=14, 17.1%), thoracic (n=17, 20.7%), and head and neck (n=21, 25.6%). The distribution of tumor stage (AJCC) was I (n=12, 14.6%), II (n=12, 14.6%), III (n=14, 17.1%), IV (n=38, 46.3%), and unknown/unavailable (n=6, 7.3%). Of the cohort, 65 patients with 66 cancers (80.5%) received radiation. Among them, the 6-month, 1-year, and 5-year follow-up rates were 41.5%, 27.7%, and 3.1%, respectively. Subset analysis limited to stage I-III patients (n=30) revealed 6-month, 1-year and 5-year follow-up rates of 41.9%, 22.6%, and 3.2%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: This study highlights inequalities in cancer stage at diagnosis among a vulnerable patient population that is largely excluded from clinical research. Majority of the incarcerated patients presented with stage III & IV cancers and have poor follow up rates even among those with early-stage disease. Efforts to understand and mitigate persistent health inequalities among incarcerated patients are warranted.
Asunto(s)
Neoplasias , Prisioneros , Humanos , Masculino , Estados Unidos/epidemiología , Persona de Mediana Edad , Femenino , Proveedores de Redes de Seguridad , Estudios Retrospectivos , Neoplasias/radioterapia , Neoplasias/diagnóstico , Estadificación de NeoplasiasRESUMEN
PURPOSE: In this study, radiation oncology residents were surveyed on perceptions of diversity, equity, inclusion, and belonging in their residency training programs. METHODS AND MATERIALS: A 23-item survey was developed by the Association of Residents in Radiation Oncology Equity and Inclusion Subcommittee resident members and faculty advisors. The survey was divided into 4 sections: institutional culture, support and resources, interview and recruitment, and experiences of bias. The survey was sent individually to residents from all Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education-accredited radiation oncology programs. RESULTS: The survey was issued to 757 residents. A total of 319 residents completed the survey, for a response rate of 42%. All postgraduate years and geographic regions were represented. Significant racial, ethnic, and gender differences were present in survey response patterns. White residents (94%, 164 of 174) and male residents (96%, 186 of 194) were more likely to strongly agree/agree that they were treated with respect by their colleagues and their coworkers than other racial groups (P < .005) or gender groups (P < .008). Only 3% (5 of 174) of White residents strongly agreed/agreed that they were treated unfairly because of their race/ethnicity, while 31% (5 of 16) of Black residents and 10% (9 of 94) of Asian residents strongly agreed/agreed (P < .0001). Similarly, Hispanic residents were more likely to strongly agree/agree (24%, 5 of 21) than non-Hispanic residents (7%, 20 of 298) (Pâ¯=â¯.003). Regarding mentorship, there were no differences by gender or ethnicity. There were differences by race in residents reporting that they had a supportive mentor (Pâ¯=â¯.022), with 89% (154 of 174) of White residents who strongly agreed/agreed, 88% (14 of 16) of Black residents, and 91% of Asian residents (86 of 94). CONCLUSIONS: This survey reveals that experiences of support, mentorship, inclusion, and bias vary significantly among radiation oncology residents based on race, ethnicity, and gender. Radiation oncology has opportunity for growth to ensure an equitable experience for all residents.
Asunto(s)
Internado y Residencia , Oncología por Radiación , Humanos , Masculino , Oncología por Radiación/educación , Educación de Postgrado en Medicina , Encuestas y Cuestionarios , MentoresRESUMEN
In recent years, the number of educational medical resources accessible to residents and practicing radiation oncologists online has grown exponentially to include discussion boards, wikis, videos, podcasts, journal clubs, online communities, and interactive experiences to augment medical education. In this review, we identify, catalog, and critically evaluate educational websites, smartphone applications, web-based multimedia, and podcasts for radiation oncologists. Literature searches were conducted over a 2-month period (April to May 2022) using OVID-MEDLINE and PubMed with a combination of relevant search terms. Websites of relevant radiation oncology societies were reviewed for e-learning resources. Internet searches including the Google search engine, application stores, and podcast-publisher websites were conducted to identify digital resources for radiation oncology education. To ensure credibility, resources were assessed by two independent reviewers utilizing the criteria of authority, accuracy, objectivity, currency, depth, and appearance per suggested formats for evaluating digital resources in medical literature. Literature searches using OVID-MEDLINE and PubMed yielded 425 citations. Those pertinent to radiation oncology provide examples of resource development, integrations into curriculum, interactive modules, case studies, and learner experiences. The multilevel search identified 47 free digital education resources including online radiation oncology tutorials, podcasts, videos, slide sets, applications, and other interactive resources, some requiring membership or a fee for full access. The myriad online educational tools available to radiation oncology residents represent excellent resources for continuing education. This review represents the first comprehensive summary of available online education resources for radiation oncologists to guide clinicians who are increasingly reliant on digital resources, especially during the COVID-19 pandemic.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: The complex relationship between incarceration and cancer survival has not been thoroughly evaluated. We assessed whether cancer diagnosis during incarceration or the immediate post-release period is associated with higher rates of mortality compared with those never incarcerated. METHODS: We conducted a population-based study using a statewide linkage of tumor registry and correctional system movement data for Connecticut adult residents diagnosed with invasive cancer from 2005 through 2016. The independent variable was place of cancer diagnosis: during incarceration, within 12 months post-release, and never incarcerated. The dependent variables were five-year cancer-related and overall survival rates. RESULTS: Of the 216,540 adults diagnosed with invasive cancer during the study period, 239 (0.11%) people were diagnosed during incarceration, 479 (0.22%) within 12 months following release, and the remaining were never incarcerated. After accounting for demographics and cancer characteristics, including stage of diagnosis, the risk for cancer-related death at five years was significantly higher among those diagnosed while incarcerated (AHR = 1.39, 95% CI = 1.12-1.73) and those recently released (AHR = 1.82, 95% CI = 1.57-2.10) compared to the never-incarcerated group. The risk for all-cause mortality was also higher for those diagnosed with cancer while incarcerated (AHR = 1.92, 95% CI = 1.63-2.26) and those recently released (AHR = 2.18, 95% CI = 1.94-2.45). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: There is a higher risk of cancer mortality among individuals diagnosed with cancer during incarceration and in the first-year post-release, which is not fully explained by stage of diagnosis. Cancer prevention and treatment efforts should target people who experience incarceration and identify why incarceration is associated with worse outcomes.