Disease progression, survival, and molecular disparities in Black and White patients with endometrioid endometrial carcinoma in real-world registries and GOG/NRG oncology randomized phase III clinical trials.

OBJECTIVE: Investigate racial disparities in outcomes and molecular features in Black and White patients with endometrioid endometrial carcinoma (EEC). METHODS: Black and White patients diagnosed with EEC who underwent hysterectomy ± adjuvant treatment in SEER, National Cancer Database (NCDB), the Genomics Evidence Neoplasia Information Exchange (GENIE) project (v.13.0), and eight NCI-sponsored randomized phase III clinical trials (RCTs) were studied. Hazard ratio (HR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) were estimated for cancer-related death (CRD), non-cancer death (NCD), and all-cause death. RESULTS: Black (n = 4397) vs. White (n = 47,959) patients in SEER had a HR (95% CI) of 2.04 (1.87-2.23) for CRD and 1.22 (1.09-1.36) for NCD. In NCDB, the HR (95% CI) for death in Black (n = 13,468) vs. White (n = 155,706) patients was 1.52 (1.46-1.58) dropping to 1.29 (1.23-1.36) after propensity-score matching for age, comorbidity, income, insurance, grade, stage, LVSI, and treatment. In GENIE, Black (n = 109) vs. White (n = 1780) patients had fewer PTEN, PIK3R1, FBXW7, NF1, mTOR, CCND1, and PI3K-pathway-related gene mutations. In contrast, TP53 and DNA-repair-related gene mutation frequency as well as tumor mutational burden-high status were similar in Black and White patients. In RCTs, Black (n = 187) vs. White (n = 2877) patients were more likely to have advanced or recurrent disease, higher grade, worse performance status and progressive disease. Risk of death in Black vs. White patients in RCTs was 2.19 (1.77-2.71) persisting to 1.32 (1.09-1.61) after matching for grade, stage, and treatment arm while balancing age and performance status. CONCLUSIONS: Differences exist in clinical presentation, outcomes, and molecular features in Black vs. White patients with EEC in real-world registries and RCTs. Targeted-drug development, strategies to modify social determinants, and diverse inclusion in RCTs are approaches to reduce disparities.

Racial, ethnic and country of origin disparities in aggressive endometrial cancer histologic subtypes.

OBJECTIVE: This study investigated the risk of an aggressive endometrial cancer (EC) diagnosis by race, ethnicity, and country of origin to further elucidate histologic disparities in non-Hispanic Black (NHB), Hispanic, Asian/Pacific Islander (API), American Indian/Alaskan Native (AIAN) vs. non-Hispanic White (NHW) patients, particularly in Hispanic or API subgroups. METHODS: Patient diagnosed between 2004 and 2020 with low grade (LG)-endometrioid endometrial cancer (ECC) or an aggressive EC including grade 3 EEC, serous carcinoma, clear cell carcinoma, mixed epithelial carcinoma, or carcinosarcoma in the National Cancer Database were studied. The odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) for diagnosis of an aggressive EC histology was estimated using logistic modeling. RESULTS: There were 343,868 NHW, 48,897 NHB, 30,013 Hispanic, 15,015 API and 1646 AIAN patients. The OR (95% CI) for an aggressive EC diagnosis was 3.07 (3.01-3.13) for NHB, 1.08 (1.06-1.11) for Hispanic, 1.17 (1.13-1.21) for API and 1.07 (0.96-1.19) for AIAN, relative to NHW patients. Subset analyses by country of origin illustrated the diversity in the OR for an aggressive EC diagnosis among Hispanic (1.18 for Mexican to 1.87 for Dominican), Asian (1.14 Asian Indian-Pakistani to 1.48 Korean) and Pacific Islander (1.00 for Hawaiian to 1.33 for Samoan) descendants. Hispanic, API and AIAN patients were diagnosed 5-years younger that NHW patients, and the risk for an aggressive EC histology were all significantly higher than NHW patients after correcting for age. Insurance status was another independent risk factor for aggressive histology. CONCLUSIONS: Risk of an aggressive EC diagnosis varied by race, ethnicity, and country of origin. NHB patients had the highest risk, followed by Dominican, South/Central American, Cuban, Korean, Thai, Vietnamese, and Filipino descendants.

Factors Associated With Survival Disparities Between Non-Hispanic Black and White Patients With Uterine Cancer.

Importance: Disparities in survival exist between non-Hispanic Black (hereafter, Black) and non-Hispanic White (hereafter, White) patients with uterine cancer. Objective: To investigate factors associated with racial disparities in survival between Black and White patients with uterine cancer. Design, Setting, and Patients: This cohort study used data from the National Cancer Database on 274 838 Black and White patients who received a diagnosis of uterine cancer from January 1, 2004, to December 31, 2017, with follow-up through December 2020. Statistical analysis was performed in July 2022. Main Outcomes and Measures: Overall survival by self-reported race and evaluation of explanatory study factors associated with hazard ratio (HR) reduction for Black vs White patients. A propensity scoring approach was applied sequentially to balance racial differences in demographic characteristics, comorbidity score, neighborhood income, insurance status, histologic subtype, disease stage, and treatment. Results: The study included 32 230 Black female patients (mean [SD] age at diagnosis, 63.8 [10.0] years) and 242 608 White female patients (mean [SD] age at diagnosis, 63.5 [10.5] years) and had a median follow-up of 74.0 months (range, 43.5-113.8 months). Black patients were more likely than White patients to have low income (44.1% vs 14.0%), be uninsured (5.7% vs 2.6%), present with nonendometrioid histologic characteristics (46.1% vs 21.6%), have an advanced disease stage (34.1% vs 19.8%), receive first-line chemotherapy (33.8% vs 18.2%), and have worse 5-year survival (58.6% vs 78.5%). Among patients who received a diagnosis at younger than 65 years of age, the HR for death for Black vs White patients was 2.43 (95% CI, 2.34-2.52) in a baseline demographic-adjusted model and 1.29 (95% CI, 1.23-1.35) after balancing other factors. Comorbidity score, neighborhood income, insurance status, histologic subtype, disease stage, treatment, and unexplained factors accounted for 0.8%, 7.2%, 11.5%, 53.1%, 5.8%, 1.2%, and 20.4%, respectively, of the excess relative risk (ERR) among the younger Black vs White patients. Among patients 65 years or older, the HR for death for Black vs White patients was 1.87 (95% CI, 1.81-1.93) in the baseline model and 1.14 (95% CI, 1.09-1.19) after balancing other factors. Comorbidity score, neighborhood income, insurance status, histologic subtype, disease stage, treatment, and unexplained factors accounted for 3.0%, 7.5%, 0.0%, 56.2%, 10.6%, 6.9%, and 15.8%, respectively, of the ERR among Black vs White patients aged 65 years or older. Conclusions and Relevance: This study suggests that histologic subtype was the dominant factor associated with racial survival disparity among patients with uterine cancer, while insurance status represented the main modifiable factor for women younger than 65 years. Additional studies of interactions between biology and social determinants of health are merited.