Characterizing disparities in receipt of palliative care for Asian Americans, Native Hawaiians, and Pacific Islanders with metastatic cancer in the United States.

PURPOSE: Palliative care plays essential roles in cancer care. However, differences in receipt among individuals identifying as Asian American, Native Hawaiian, and Other Pacific Islanders (AA&NHPI) with cancer are not well-characterized, especially when these diverse groups are disaggregated. We characterized disparities in receipt of palliative care among AA&NHPI patients with AJCC Stage IV prostate, breast, or lung cancer. METHODS: We performed multivariable logistic regressions were performed in this retrospective cohort analysis, using deidentified data from the National Cancer Database (NCDB) of patients diagnosed with AJCC analytic group stage IV breast, lung, or prostate cancer (2004-2018) who were White or of Asian Indian/Pakistani, Chinese, Filipino, Hawaiian, Hmong, Japanese, Kampuchean, Korean, Laotian, Other Pacific Islander, Thai, or Vietnamese descent. We conducted multivariable logistic regression analyses in a retrospective cohort study using deidentified data from the National Cancer Database (NCDB). The study included patients diagnosed with AJCC analytic group Stage IV breast, lung, or prostate cancer between 2004 and 2018, who were White or identified as Asian Indian/Pakistani, Chinese, Filipino, Hawaiian, Hmong, Japanese, Kampuchean, Korean, Laotian, Other Pacific Islander, Thai, or Vietnamese descent. Adjusted odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals of receiving palliative care were measured when comparing White vs. AA&NHPI patients as one cohort and White vs. disaggregated AA&NHPI patients, adjusting for clinical, socioeconomic, and demographic covariates. RESULTS: Among 775,289 individuals diagnosed with cancer (median age: 68 years), no significant differences in palliative care receipt were observed between White patients and aggregated AA&NHPI patients among patients with prostate, breast, or lung cancer. However, disaggregated analyses revealed reduced palliative care receipt for breast cancer patients of Asian Indian/Pakistani descent (AOR 0.75, 95% CI, 0.60-0.94, P = 0.011) and for lung cancer patients of Chinese, Vietnamese, Thai, and Asian Indian/Pakistani descent compared to White patients (Chinese AOR 0.88, [0.81-0.94], P = 0.001; Vietnamese AOR 0.89, [0.80 to 0.99], P = 0.032; Thai AOR 0.64, [0.44-0.92], P = 0.016; Asian Indian/Pakistani AOR 0.83, [0.74-0.93], P = 0.001). Palliative care was greater for patients of Japanese and Hawaiian descent with prostate cancer (Japanese AOR 1.92, [1.32-2.75], P = 0.001; Hawaiian AOR 2.09, [1.20-3.66], P = 0.009), breast cancer (Japanese AOR 1.72, [1.21-2.43], P = 0.001; Hawaiian AOR 1.70, [1.08-2.67], P = 0.021), and lung cancer (Japanese AOR 1.92, [1.70-2.17], P < 0.001; Hawaiian AOR 2.95, [2.5-3.5], P < 0.001), as well as patients of Other Pacific Islander descent with lung cancer (AOR 1.62, [1.34-1.96], P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Our findings demonstrate disparities in receipt of palliative care upon disaggregation of diverse AA&NHPI groups, the need for disaggregated research and targeted interventions that address the unique cultural, socioeconomic, and healthcare system barriers to palliative care receipt.

Race and Ethnicity, Socioeconomic Factors, and Epigenetic Age Acceleration in Survivors of Childhood Cancer.

Importance: Current research in epigenetic age acceleration (EAA) is limited to non-Hispanic White individuals. It is imperative to improve inclusivity by considering racial and ethnic minorities in EAA research. Objective: To compare non-Hispanic Black with non-Hispanic White survivors of childhood cancer by examining the associations of EAA with cancer treatment exposures, potential racial and ethnic disparity in EAA, and mediating roles of social determinants of health (SDOH). Design, Setting, and Participants: In this cross-sectional study, participants were from the St Jude Lifetime Cohort, which was initiated in 2007 with ongoing follow-up. Eligible participants included non-Hispanic Black and non-Hispanic White survivors of childhood cancer treated at St Jude Children's Research Hospital between 1962 and 2012 who had DNA methylation data. Data analysis was conducted from February 2023 to May 2024. Exposure: Three treatment exposures for childhood cancer (chest radiotherapy, alkylating agents, and epipodophyllotoxin). Main Outcomes and Measures: DNA methylation was generated from peripheral blood mononuclear cell-derived DNA. EAA was calculated as residuals from regressing Levine or Horvath epigenetic age on chronological age. SDOH included educational attainment, annual personal income, and the socioeconomic area deprivation index (ADI). General linear models evaluated cross-sectional associations of EAA with race and ethnicity (non-Hispanic Black and non-Hispanic White) and/or SDOH, adjusting for sex, body mass index, smoking, and cancer treatments. Adjusted least square means (ALSM) of EAA were calculated for group comparisons. Mediation analysis treated SDOH as mediators with average causal mediation effect (ACME) calculated for the association of EAA with race and ethnicity. Results: Among a total of 1706 survivors including 230 non-Hispanic Black survivors (median [IQR] age at diagnosis, 9.5 [4.3-14.3] years; 103 male [44.8%] and 127 female [55.2%]) and 1476 non-Hispanic White survivors (median [IQR] age at diagnosis, 9.3 [3.9-14.6] years; 766 male [51.9%] and 710 female [48.1%]), EAA was significantly greater among non-Hispanic Black survivors (ALSM = 1.41; 95% CI, 0.66 to 2.16) than non-Hispanic White survivors (ALSM = 0.47; 95% CI, 0.12 to 0.81). Among non-Hispanic Black survivors, EAA was significantly increased among those exposed to chest radiotherapy (ALSM = 2.82; 95% CI, 1.37 to 4.26) vs those unexposed (ALSM = 0.46; 95% CI, -0.60 to 1.51), among those exposed to alkylating agents (ALSM = 2.33; 95% CI, 1.21 to 3.45) vs those unexposed (ALSM = 0.95; 95% CI, -0.38 to 2.27), and among those exposed to epipodophyllotoxins (ALSM = 2.83; 95% CI, 1.27 to 4.40) vs those unexposed (ALSM = 0.44; 95% CI, -0.52 to 1.40). The association of EAA with epipodophyllotoxins differed by race and ethnicity (ß for non-Hispanic Black survivors, 2.39 years; 95% CI, 0.74 to 4.04 years; ß for non-Hispanic White survivors, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.05 to 1.31 years) and the difference was significant (1.77 years; 95% CI, 0.01 to 3.53 years; P for interaction = .049). Racial and ethnic disparities in EAA were mediated by educational attainment (

Disparate Rates of Germline Variants in Cancer Predisposition Genes in African American/Black Compared With Non-Hispanic White Individuals Between 2015 and 2022.

PURPOSE: African American/Black (AA/B) individuals are under-represented in genomic databases and thus less likely to receive definitive information from germline genetic testing (GGT) than non-Hispanic White (NHW) individuals. With nearly 500,000 AA/B and NHW individuals having undergone multigene panel testing (MGPT) for hereditary cancer risk at a single commercial laboratory, to our knowledge, we present the largest study to date investigating cancer GGT results in AA/B and NHW individuals. METHODS: MGPT results from a retrospective cohort of AA/B (n = 48,684) and NHW (n = 444,831) patients were evaluated. Frequencies of pathogenic germline variants (PGVs) and variants of uncertain significance (VUS) were compared between AA/B and NHW individuals. Changes in frequency of VUS over time were determined. Pearson's chi-squared test was used to compare categorical variables among groups. All significance tests were two-tailed, and P < .05 was considered statistically significant. RESULTS: Between 2015 and 2022, rates of VUS decreased 2.3-fold in AA/B and 1.8-fold in NHW individuals; however, frequencies of VUS and PGV remained significantly higher (46% v 32%; P < .0001) and lower (9% v 13%; P < .0001) in AA/B compared with NHW individuals. Rates of VUS in ATM, BRCA1, BRCA2, PALB2, and PMS2 were significantly higher in AA/B compared with NHW individuals, whereas rates of PGV in BRCA1, BRCA2, and PALB2 were higher in AA/B compared with NHW individuals (P < .001). CONCLUSION: Despite reductions in VUS frequencies over time, disparities in definitive GGT results persist. Increasing inclusion of AA/B populations in both testing and research will further increase knowledge of genetic variants across these racial groups.

Fairness in Predicting Cancer Mortality Across Racial Subgroups.

Importance: Machine learning has potential to transform cancer care by helping clinicians prioritize patients for serious illness conversations. However, models need to be evaluated for unequal performance across racial groups (ie, racial bias) so that existing racial disparities are not exacerbated. Objective: To evaluate whether racial bias exists in a predictive machine learning model that identifies 180-day cancer mortality risk among patients with solid malignant tumors. Design, Setting, and Participants: In this cohort study, a machine learning model to predict cancer mortality for patients aged 21 years or older diagnosed with cancer between January 2016 and December 2021 was developed with a random forest algorithm using retrospective data from the Mount Sinai Health System cancer registry, Social Security Death Index, and electronic health records up to the date when databases were accessed for cohort extraction (February 2022). Exposure: Race category. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcomes were model discriminatory performance (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve [AUROC], F1 score) among each race category (Asian, Black, Native American, White, and other or unknown) and fairness metrics (equal opportunity, equalized odds, and disparate impact) among each pairwise comparison of race categories. True-positive rate ratios represented equal opportunity; both true-positive and false-positive rate ratios, equalized odds; and the percentage of predictive positive rate ratios, disparate impact. All metrics were estimated as a proportion or ratio, with variability captured through 95% CIs. The prespecified criterion for the model's clinical use was a threshold of at least 80% for fairness metrics across different racial groups to ensure the model's prediction would not be biased against any specific race. Results: The test validation dataset included 43 274 patients with balanced demographics. Mean (SD) age was 64.09 (14.26) years, with 49.6% older than 65 years. A total of 53.3% were female; 9.5%, Asian; 18.9%, Black; 0.1%, Native American; 52.2%, White; and 19.2%, other or unknown race; 0.1% had missing race data. A total of 88.9% of patients were alive, and 11.1% were dead. The AUROCs, F1 scores, and fairness metrics maintained reasonable concordance among the racial subgroups: the AUROCs ranged from 0.75 (95% CI, 0.72-0.78) for Asian patients and 0.75 (95% CI, 0.73-0.77) for Black patients to 0.77 (95% CI, 0.75-0.79) for patients with other or unknown race; F1 scores, from 0.32 (95% CI, 0.32-0.33) for White patients to 0.40 (95% CI, 0.39-0.42) for Black patients; equal opportunity ratios, from 0.96 (95% CI, 0.95-0.98) for Black patients compared with White patients to 1.02 (95% CI, 1.00-1.04) for Black patients compared with patients with other or unknown race; equalized odds ratios, from 0.87 (95% CI, 0.85-0.92) for Black patients compared with White patients to 1.16 (1.10-1.21) for Black patients compared with patients with other or unknown race; and disparate impact ratios, from 0.86 (95% CI, 0.82-0.89) for Black patients compared with White patients to 1.17 (95% CI, 1.12-1.22) for Black patients compared with patients with other or unknown race. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study, the lack of significant variation in performance or fairness metrics indicated an absence of racial bias, suggesting that the model fairly identified cancer mortality risk across racial groups. It remains essential to consistently review the model's application in clinical settings to ensure equitable patient care.

Assessing interventions promoting the uptake of cancer-related genomic services within the Latino community: A scoping review using the RE-AIM framework.

Cancer genomic services (CGS) can support genetic risk-stratified cancer prevention and treatment. Racial/ethnic minority groups are less likely to access and utilize CGS compared with non-Hispanic Whites. Little research has described characteristics of interventions targeted at CGS among Latinos. This scoping review aimed to (1) describe interventions promoting uptake of CGS among Latinos in the United States and Latin America, (2) describe intervention adaptations for Latino participants, and (3) summarize intervention implementation factors suggested by reach, effectiveness, adoption, implementation, and maintenance (RE-AIM) framework. We conducted a search in English and Spanish of literature published between 2005 and 2022 across PubMed and Latin American and Caribbean Health Sciences Literature databases. Sixteen of 2344 papers met the inclusion criteria of the analysis. Efforts to promote CGS among Latino communities were limited in the US and lower in Latin America. This review highlights the need for in-depth exploration of acculturation-informed interventions and better reporting on implementation factors to enhance their scalability across diverse settings.

Outcomes Among Racial and Ethnic Minority Patients With Advanced Cancers in Phase 1 Trials: A Meta-Analysis.

Importance: Patients from racial and ethnic minority groups (eg, Asian, Hispanic, and non-Hispanic Black patients) have low representation in clinical trials, especially in phase 1 trials in cancer. These trials represent valuable options for patients with advanced cancer who experience disease progression with standard therapy. Objective: To determine whether the benefit of enrollment to phase 1 cancer trials extends to Asian, Hispanic, and non-Hispanic Black patients as much as it does for non-Hispanic White patients. Data Sources: Patient records at a single institution from January 1999 to December 2016 were reviewed. Treatment-related responses, toxic effects, and deaths were recorded. Study Selection: All phase 1 studies were included. Data Extraction and Synthesis: Data underwent independent extraction by multiple observers following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) reporting guideline. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was overall survival (OS), assessed using univariate and multivariable time-to-event analyses. Results: A total of 738 patients (median [range], 60 [22-93] years; 467 [63.3] female) including 197 Hispanic patients (26.7%), 238 non-Hispanic Black patients (32.2%), and 282 non-Hispanic White patients (38.2%), were enrolled in 64 phase 1 trials, including 33 cytotoxic trials (51.5%), 21 biologic trials (32.8%), and 10 combined therapy trials (15.6%). The primary cancer diagnoses were colorectal (187 patients [25.3%]), ovarian (141 patients [19.1%]), lung (58 patients [7.9%]), uterine (49 patients [6.6%]), and breast (41 patients [5.6%]). Patients underwent a median (range) of 3 (0-13) therapies prior to trial enrollment. Among 558 patients evaluated for response, the clinical benefit rate (ie, stable disease plus response rates) was 49.1%, and the overall response rate was 6.5%. Grade 3 or 4 nonhematological toxic effects were observed in 27.8% (95% CI, 24.6%-31.3%) of patients and grade 3 or 4 hematological toxic effects were observed in 19.7% (95% CI, 17.0%-22.8%) of patients. The treatment-related mortality rate was 0.9% (95% CI, 0.4%-1.9%). Median OS was 9.6 (95% CI, 8.2-11.0) months among Hispanic patients, 8.3 (95% CI, 6.7-10.4) months among non-Hispanic Black patients, and 9.8 (95% CI, 8.5-11.4) months among non-Hispanic White patients (P = .13). In a multivariable analysis, age older than 60 years, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status score of 2 or greater, more than 2 metastatic sites, lactate dehydrogenase grade 1 or 2, grade 2 or greater low albumin, grade 1 or greater total bilirubin, and grade 2 or greater anemia were associated with worse prognosis, whereas leukocytosis greater than grade 1 was associated with better OS. Conclusions and Relevance: In this meta-analysis assessing outcomes in phase 1 cancer trials among patients from racial and ethnic minority groups, Hispanic and non-Hispanic Black patients had benefits similar to those of non-Hispanic White patients.

Towards precision cancer medicine for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander cancer health equity.

Delivering cancer control at scale for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities is a national priority that requires Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander leadership and codesign, as well as significant involvement of the Aboriginal community-controlled health sector. The unique genomic variation observed among Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples may have implications for standard and precision medicine. Yet, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples are absent from, or under-represented within, human reference genome resources, genomic studies, cancer studies, cancer cell lines, patient-derived xenografts and cancer clinical trials. Genomics-guided precision cancer medicine offers an opportunity to reduce cancer health disparities experienced by Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples through personalising prevention, diagnosis, treatment and long term management. Here, we describe what is required to ensure that Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples can receive the benefits of precision cancer medicine. Equity of access to care, an Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander cancer workforce, and appropriate genome reference resources are important for safe and effective cancer medicine. Building Indigenous data sovereignty principles and Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander governance into research is required to protect Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander rights and collective interests. Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander community engagement should be undertaken to develop an understanding of the unique cultural and ethical considerations for precision cancer research. Local and national genomic health research guidelines are needed to define a consensus best practice in genomics research with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples.

Cancer mortality by country of birth and cancer type in Sweden: A 25-year registry-based cohort study.

Numerous studies have reported lower overall cancer mortality rates among immigrants compared to native populations. However, limited information exists regarding cancer mortality among immigrants based on specific birth countries and cancer types. We used population-based registries and followed 10 million individuals aged 20 years or older in Sweden between 1992 and 2016. The Cox proportional hazard model was used to explore the disparities in cancer mortality by country of birth and cancer type, stratified by gender. Age-standardized mortality rates were also computed using the world standard population. Hazard ratio (HR) of all-site cancer was slightly lower among immigrants (males: HRm = 0.97: 95% confidence interval: 0.95, 0.98; females: HRf = 0.93: 0.91, 0.94) than Swedish-born population. However, the immigrants showed higher mortality for infection-related cancers, including liver (HRf = 1.10: 1.01, 1.19; HRm = 1.10: 1.02, 1.17), stomach (HRf = 1.39: 1.31, 1.49; HRm = 1.33: 1.26, 1.41) cancers, and tobacco-related cancers, including lung (HRm = 1.44: 1.40, 1.49), and laryngeal cancers (HRm = 1.47: 1.24, 1.75). The HR of mesothelioma was also significantly higher in immigrants (HRf = 1.44: 1.10, 1.90). Mortality from lung cancer was specifically higher in men from Nordic (HRm = 1.41: 1.27, 1.55) and non-Nordic Europe (HRm = 1.49: 1.43, 1.55) countries and lower in Asian (HRm = 0.78: 0.66, 0.93) and South American men (HRm = 0.70: 0.57, 0.87). In conclusion, there are large variations in cancer mortality by country of birth, and cancer type and require regular surveillance. Our detailed analyses lead to some novel findings such as excess mortality rate of mesothelioma and laryngeal cancers in Immigrants in Sweden. A targeted cancer prevention program among immigrants in Sweden is needed.

Utilisation of endocrine therapy for cancer in Indigenous peoples: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Indigenous peoples worldwide experience inequitable cancer outcomes, and it is unclear if this is underpinned by differences in or inadequate use of endocrine treatment (ET), often used in conjunction with other cancer treatments. Previous studies examining ET use in Indigenous peoples have predominately focused on the sub-national level, often resulting in small sample sizes with limited statistical power. This systematic review aimed to collate the findings ofarticles on ET utilisation for Indigenous cancer patients and describe relevant factors that may influence ET use. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies reporting ET use for cancer among Indigenous populations worldwide. PubMed, Scopus, CINAHL, Web of Science, and Embase were searched for relevant articles. A random-effect meta-analysis was used to pool proportions of ET use. We also performed a subgroup analysis (such as with sample sizes) and a meta-regression to explore the potential sources of heterogeneity. A socio-ecological model was used to present relevant factors that could impact ET use. RESULTS: Thirteen articles reported ET utilisation among Indigenous populations, yielding a pooled estimate of 67% (95% CI:54 - 80), which is comparable to that of Indigenous populations 67% (95% CI: 53 - 81). However, among studies with sufficiently sized study sample/cohorts (≥ 500), Indigenous populations had a 14% (62%; 95% CI:43 - 82) lower ET utilisation than non-Indigenous populations (76%; 95% CI: 60 - 92). The ET rate in Indigenous peoples of the USA (e.g., American Indian) and New Zealand (e.g., Maori) was 72% (95% CI:56-88) and 60% (95% CI:49-71), respectively. Compared to non-Indigenous populations, a higher proportion of Indigenous populations were diagnosed with advanced cancer, at younger age, had limited access to health services, lower socio-economic status, and a higher prevalence of comorbidities. CONCLUSIONS: Indigenous cancer patients have lower ET utilisation than non-Indigenous cancer patients, despite the higher rate of advanced cancer at diagnosis. While reasons for these disparities are unclear, they are likely reflecting, at least to some degree, inequitable access to cancer treatment services. Strengthening the provision of and access to culturally appropriate cancer care and treatment services may enhance ET utilisation in Indigenous population. This study protocol was registered on Prospero (CRD42023403562).

Types of Racism and Health Disparities and Inequalities among Cancer Patients: An Editorial Reflection of Articles in This Special Issue of IJERPH.

Racism has been a long-standing influential factor that has negatively impacted both past and current health disparities within the United Sates population. Existing problems of racism and its impact on both health disparities and health inequalities were only amplified during the COVID-19 pandemic. The pandemic allowed both clinicians and researchers to recognize a growing list of health concerns at the macro-, meso-, and micro-level among underserved racially minoritized patients with specific chronic illnesses such as cancer. Based on these concerns, this Special Issue was designed to highlight the challenges of cancer screening, cancer treatment, and cancer-centered educational outreach among racially minoritized communities.

'How Your Spirit Is Travelling'-Understanding First Nations Peoples' Experiences of Living Well with and after Cancer.

As the number of people living with cancer increases, it is important to understand how people can live well with and after cancer. First Nations people diagnosed with cancer in Australia experience survival disparities relating to health service accessibility and a lack of understanding of cultural needs and lived experiences. This study aimed to amplify the voices of First Nations individuals impacted by cancer and advance the development of a culturally informed care pathway. Indigenist research methodology guided the relational and transformative approach of this study. Participants included varied cancer experts, including First Nations people living well with and after cancer, health professionals, researchers, and policy makers. Data were collected through online Yarning circles and analysed according to an inductive thematic approach. The experience of First Nations people living well with and after cancer is inextricably connected with family. The overall themes encompass hope, family, and culture and the four priority areas included the following: strength-based understanding of cancer, cancer information, access to healthcare and support, and holistic cancer services. Respect for culture is interwoven throughout. Models of survivorship care need to integrate family-centred cancer care to holistically support First Nations people throughout and beyond their cancer journey.

Race and Ethnicity Representation in Phase 2/3 Oncology Clinical Trial Publications: A Systematic Review.

Importance: The five 1997 Office of Management and Budget races in the US include American Indian or Alaska Native, Asian, Black or African American, Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander, and White, with Hispanic ethnicity. Despite the Affordable Care Act mandating Office of Management and Budget-based collecting and reporting standards, race and ethnicity publishing in medical journals is inconsistent, despite being necessary to achieve health equity. Objective: To quantify race and ethnicity reporting rates and calculate representation quotients (RQs) in published oncology clinical trials. Evidence Review: In this systematic review, PubMed and Embase were queried for phase 2/3 clinical trials of the 6 most common noncutaneous solid cancers, published between January 1, 2012, and December 31, 2022, in 4 high-impact journals. Trial characteristics were recorded. The RQs for each race and ethnicity were calculated by dividing the percent of representation in each clinical trial publication by the percent of year-matched, site-specific incident cancers in the US, compared with Kruskal-Wallis tests with Bonferroni correction (BC). Reporting was compared between journal publications and ClinicalTrials.gov. Findings: Among 1202 publications evaluated, 364 met inclusion criteria: 16 JAMA, 241 Journal of Clinical Oncology, 19 Lancet, and 88 New England Journal of Medicine. Publications included 268 209 patients (171 132 women [64%]), with a median of 356 (IQR, 131-800) patients per publication. Reported race and ethnicity included American Indian or Alaska Native in 52 (14%) publications, Asian in 196 (54%), Black or African American in 215 (59%), Hispanic in 67 (18%), Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander in 28 (8%), and White in 254 (70%). Median RQ varied across race (P < .001 BC), with 1.04 (IQR, 0.09-4.77) for Asian, 0.98 (IQR, 0.86-1.06) for White, 0.42 (IQR, 0.12-0.75) for Black or African American, and 0.00 (IQR, 0.00-0.00) for both American Indian or Alaska Native and Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander patients. Sensitivity analyses showed similar findings on subset analysis for US-only clinical trials. There was significantly less race and ethnicity reporting in the clinical trial publications compared with ClinicalTrials.gov documentation for American Indian or Alaska Native (14% vs 45%; P < .001 per McNemar χ2 test with continuity correction [MC]) and Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander (8% vs 43%; P < .001 MC). Conclusions and Relevance: While most phase 2/3 oncology clinical trials published in high-impact journals report race and ethnicity, most did not report American Indian or Alaska Native and Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander racial categories. Our findings support a call to action for consistent journal policies and transparent race and ethnicity reporting, in alignment with Affordable Care Act-concordant race and ethnicity federal reporting requirements.

Racial and Ethnic Disparities in Cancer Occurrence and Outcomes in Rural United States: A Scoping Review.

BACKGROUND: Cancer is the second-leading cause of death in the United States. Most studies have reported rural versus urban and Black versus White cancer disparities. However, few studies have investigated racial disparities in rural areas. OBJECTIVE: We conducted a literature review to explore the current state of knowledge on racial and ethnic disparities in cancer attitudes, knowledge, occurrence, and outcomes in rural United States. METHODS: A systematic search of PubMed and Embase was performed. Peer-reviewed articles published in English from 2004-2023 were included. Three authors independently reviewed the articles and reached a consensus. RESULTS: After reviewing 993 articles, a total of 30 articles met the inclusion criteria and were included in the present review. Studies revealed that underrepresented racial and ethnic groups in rural areas were more likely to have low cancer-related knowledge, low screening, high incidence, less access to treatment, and high mortality compared to their White counterparts. CONCLUSION: Underrepresented racial and ethnic groups in rural areas experienced a high burden of cancer. Improving social determinants of health may help reduce cancer disparities and promote health.

Perceived discrimination and quality of life for African American and Caucasian American cancer patients: a coping mediation analysis of subtle and overt microaggressions.

OBJECTIVE: Perceived discrimination (PD; e.g. racism, agism, sexism, etc.) negatively impacts quality of life (QOL) among cancer patients. Prior research has established that for African American Cancer Patients (AACPs) only disengagement/denial coping mediated the PD-QOL relationship. In contrast, for Caucasian American Cancer Patients (CACPs), both agentic and disengagement/denial coping were mediators of the PD-QOL relationship. However, according to social constraint theory there may be a difference between subtle and overt PD in terms of the utility of certain coping mechanisms in relation to QOL, especially for AACPs. METHOD: 217 AACPs and 121 CACPs completed measures of PD, coping (agentic, disengagement/denial, adaptive disengagement) and QOL. PD items were classified as subtle or overt microaggressions. PD was mainly attributed to race/ethnicity by AACPs and to income, age, and physical appearance for CACPs. RESULTS: : In both subtle and overt microaggression models with CACPs, agentic coping and disengagement/denial coping were significant mediators of PD-QOL. Like CACPs, for AACPs, agentic and disengagement/denial coping were significant in the context of subtle microaggressions. In contrast, for overt microaggression only disengagement/denial coping was a significant mediator of the PD-QOL relationship for AACPs. Adaptive disengagement was related to QOL only for AACPs. CONCLUSIONS: : Whereas more research is needed, it appears that overt microaggressions for AACPs, that consist mainly of racial and ethnic maltreatment, constitute a class of social contexts that may raise above the threshold for serious threat and harm, and, as a result, disengagement/constraint may reduce negative consequences. This additional burden for AACPs contributes to disparities in QOL. Future research is needed on the utility of adaptive disengagement for AACPs in relation to PD.

Equitable inclusion of diverse populations in oncology clinical trials: deterrents and drivers.

The burden of cancer exerts a disproportionate impact across different regions and population subsets. Disease-specific attributes, coupled with genetic and socioeconomic factors, significantly influence cancer treatment outcomes. Precision oncology promises the development of safe and effective options for specific ethnic phenotypes and clinicodemographic profiles. Currently, clinical trials are concentrated in resource-rich geographies with younger, healthier, white, educated, and empowered populations. Vulnerable and marginalized people are often deprived of opportunities to participate in clinical trials. Despite consistent endeavors by regulators, industry, and other stakeholders, factors including diversity in trial regulations and patient and provider-related cultural, logistic, and operational barriers limit the inclusiveness of clinical trials. Understanding and addressing these constraints by collaborative actions involving regulatory initiatives, industry, patient advocacy groups, community engagement in a culturally sensitive manner, and designing and promoting decentralized clinical trials are vital to establishing a clinical research ecosystem that promotes equity in the representation of population subgroups.

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.).

Racial and Ethnic Inequities in Cancer Care Continuity During the COVID-19 Pandemic Among Those With SARS-CoV-2.

Importance: Racially and ethnically minoritized US adults were disproportionately impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic and experience poorer cancer outcomes, including inequities in cancer treatment delivery. Objective: To evaluate racial and ethnic disparities in cancer treatment delays and discontinuations (TDDs) among patients with cancer and SARS-CoV-2 during different waves of the COVID-19 pandemic in the United States. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional study used data from the American Society of Clinical Oncology Survey on COVID-19 in Oncology Registry (data collected from April 2020 to September 2022), including patients with cancer also diagnosed with SARS-CoV-2 during their care at 69 US practices. Racial and ethnic differences were examined during 5 different waves of the COVID-19 pandemic in the United States based on case surge (before July 2020, July to November 2020, December 2020 to March 2021, April 2021 to February 2022, and March to September 2022). Exposures: Race and ethnicity. Main Outcomes and Measures: TDD was defined as any cancer treatment postponed more than 2 weeks or cancelled with no plans to reschedule. To evaluate TDD associations with race and ethnicity, adjusted prevalence ratios (aPRs) were estimated using multivariable Poisson regression, accounting for nonindependence of patients within clinics, adjusting for age, sex, body mass index, comorbidities, cancer type, cancer extent, and SARS-CoV-2 severity (severe defined as death, hospitalization, intensive care unit admission, or mechanical ventilation). Results: A total of 4054 patients with cancer and SARS-CoV-2 were included (143 [3.5%] American Indian or Alaska Native, 176 [4.3%] Asian, 517 [12.8%] Black or African American, 469 [11.6%] Hispanic or Latinx, and 2747 [67.8%] White; 2403 [59.3%] female; 1419 [35.1%] aged 50-64 years; 1928 [47.7%] aged ≥65 years). The analysis focused on patients scheduled (at SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis) to receive drug-based therapy (3682 [90.8%]), radiation therapy (382 [9.4%]), surgery (218 [5.4%]), or transplant (30 [0.7%]), of whom 1853 (45.7%) experienced TDD. Throughout the pandemic, differences in racial and ethnic inequities based on case surge with overall TDD decreased over time. In multivariable analyses, non-Hispanic Black (third wave: aPR, 1.56; 95% CI, 1.31-1.85) and Hispanic or Latinx (third wave: aPR, 1.35; 95% CI, 1.13-1.62) patients with cancer were more likely to experience TDD compared with non-Hispanic White patients during the first year of the pandemic. By 2022, non-Hispanic Asian patients (aPR, 1.51; 95% CI, 1.08-2.12) were more likely to experience TDD compared with non-Hispanic White patients, and non-Hispanic American Indian or Alaska Native patients were less likely (aPR, 0.37; 95% CI, 0.16-0.89). Conclusions and Relevance: In this cross-sectional study of patients with cancer and SARS-CoV-2, racial and ethnic inequities existed in TDD throughout the pandemic; however, the disproportionate burden among racially and ethnically minoritized patients with cancer varied across SARS-CoV-2 waves. These inequities may lead to downstream adverse impacts on cancer mortality among minoritized adults in the United States.

Scoping Review of Barriers and Facilitators to Recruitment of Black People With Cancer in Biospecimen-Based Research.

The increasing focus on precision medicine to optimize cancer treatments and improve cancer outcomes is an opportunity to consider equitable engagement of people racialized as Black or African American (B/AA) in biospecimen-based cancer research. B/AA people have the highest cancer incidence and mortality rates compared with all other racial and ethnic groups in the United States, yet are under-represented in biospecimen-based research. A narrative scoping review was conducted to understand the current literature on barriers, facilitators, and evidence-based strategies associated with the engagement of B/AA people with cancer in biospecimen research. Three comprehensive searches of MEDLINE, CINAHL, Embase, and Scopus were conducted. Of 770 studies generated by the search, 10 met all inclusion criteria for this review. The most frequently reported barriers to engagement of B/AA people in biospecimen research were lack of biospecimen research awareness, fear of medical harm, and violation of personal health information privacy, resource constraints, and medical mistrust. Key facilitators included previous exposure to research, knowledge about underlying genetic causes of cancer, and altruism. Recommended strategies to increase participation of B/AA people in biospecimen-based research included community engagement, transparent communication, workforce diversity, education and training, and research participant incentives. Inclusion of B/AA people in biospecimen-based research has the potential to advance the promise of precision oncology for all patients and reduce racial disparities in cancer outcomes.

Plant-based dietary patterns and mortality from all causes, cardiovascular disease, and cancer: The Multiethnic Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Plant-based dietary patterns have been associated with lower risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD), some cancers, and related mortality in U.S. POPULATIONS: However, the quality of plant foods has rarely been considered in the association between plant-based diets and mortality, especially in a population with various racial and ethnic backgrounds. We investigated whether the adherence to plant-based dietary patterns and the healthiness of plant foods are associated with mortality from all causes, CVD, and cancer and evaluated how the association varies by race and ethnicity. METHODS: A total of 144,729 African American, Japanese American, Latino, Native Hawaiian, and White men and women who participated in the Multiethnic Cohort Study (1993-2019) were included. Cox models were used to estimate HR and 95% CI of mortality from all causes, CVD, and cancer across quintiles of three plant-based diet scores: overall plant-based diet index (PDI), healthful plant-based diet index (hPDI), and unhealthful plant-based diet index (uPDI). RESULTS: Over an average 21 years of follow-up, we identified 65,087 deaths, including 18,663 from CVD and 16,171 from cancer. Comparing the highest versus lowest quintiles, greater scores of PDI and hPDI were associated with a lower risk of all-cause mortality in both men (HR = 0.85, 95% CI: 0.82-0.89 for PDI; HR = 0.88, 95% CI: 0.85-0.91 for hPDI; both P for trend <0.0001) and women (HR = 0.89, 95% CI: 0.86-0.93 for PDI; HR = 0.86, 95% CI: 0.83-0.89 for hPDI; both P for trend <0.0001). An increased risk of all-cause mortality with uPDI was observed only in women (HR = 1.11, 95% CI: 1.07-1.15, P for trend <0.0001; P for heterogeneity by sex = 0.019). A similar trend was shown for CVD mortality with a significant increase in risk with uPDI for both men and women. PDI was associated with a lower risk of cancer mortality in men (HR = 0.86, 95% CI: 0.80-0.92, P for trend <0.0001), while neither hPDI nor uPDI was associated in either sex. Compared with the other racial and ethnic groups within each sex, the association of uPDI with all-cause mortality was stronger in White men (P for heterogeneity by race and ethnicity = 0.009) and weaker in Latino women (P for heterogeneity = 0.002). CONCLUSION: A healthy plant-based dietary pattern emphasizing the quality of plant foods was associated with a lower risk of all-cause and CVD mortality in both men and women, although the magnitude of the associations varied across racial and ethnic groups.

Universal Tobacco Screening and Opt-Out Treatment Referral Strategy Among Patients Diagnosed With Cancer by Race and Ethnicity.

This quality improvement study examines whether a universal screening and opt-out referral model could promote racial and ethnic equity in access and use of tobacco treatment among patients with cancer.