Influence of Cost-Related Considerations on Clinical Trial Participation: Results from the 2020 Health Information National Trends Survey (HINTS).

BACKGROUND: People experiencing financial burden are underrepresented in clinical trials. OBJECTIVE: Describe the prevalence of cost-related considerations influential to trial participation and their associations with person-level characteristics. DESIGN: This cross-sectional study used and assessed how three cost-related considerations would influence the decision to participate in a hypothetical clinical trial. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 3682 US adult respondents to the Health Information National Trends Survey MAIN MEASURES: Survey-weighted multivariable logistic regression estimated associations between respondent characteristics and odds of reporting cost-related considerations as very influential to participation. KEY RESULTS: Among 3682 respondents, median age was 48 (IQR 33-61). Most were non-Hispanic White (60%), living comfortably or getting by on their income (74%), with ≥ 1 medical condition (61%). Over half (55%) of respondents reported at least one cost-related consideration as very influential to trial participation, including if usual care was not covered by insurance (reported by 42%), payment for participation (24%), or support for participation (24%). Respondents who were younger (18-34 vs. ≥ 75, adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 4.3, 95% CI 2.3-8.1), more educated (high school vs.

Reimbursement Matters: Overcoming Barriers to Clinical Trial Accrual.

BACKGROUND: Accrual to cancer clinical trials is suboptimal. Few data exist regarding whether financial reimbursement might increase accruals. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to assess perceptions about reimbursement to overcome barriers to trial accrual. RESEARCH DESIGN: This was a cross-sectional survey. SUBJECTS: Oncologists identified from the American Medical Association Physician Masterfile. MEASURES: We report descriptive statistics, associations of physician characteristics with perceptions of reimbursement, domains, and subthemes of free-text comments. RESULTS: Respondents (n=1030) were mostly medical oncologists (59.4%), ages 35-54 (67%), and male (75%). Overall, 30% reported discussing trials with >25% of patients. Barriers perceived were administrative/regulatory, physician/staff time, and eligibility criteria. National Cancer Institute cooperative group participants and practice owners were more likely to endorse higher reimbursement. Respondents indicated targeted reimbursement would help improve infrastructure, but also noted potential ethical problems with reimbursement for discussion (40.7%) and accrual (85.9%). Free-text comments addressed reimbursement sources, recipients, and concerns about the real and apparent conflict of interest. CONCLUSIONS: Though concerns about a potential conflict of interest remain paramount and must be addressed in any new system of reimbursement, oncologists believe reimbursement to enhance infrastructure could help overcome barriers to trial accrual.

A randomized trial of mail and email recruitment strategies for a physician survey on clinical trial accrual.

BACKGROUND: Patient participation in cancer clinical trials is suboptimal. A challenge to capturing physicians' insights about trials has been low response to surveys. We conducted a study using varying combinations of mail and email to recruit a nationally representative sample of medical, surgical, and radiation oncologists to complete a survey on trial accrual. METHODS: We randomly assigned eligible physicians identified from the American Medical Association MasterFile (n = 13,251) to mail- or email-based recruitment strategies. Mail-based recruitment included a survey packet with: (1) cover letter describing the survey and inviting participation; (2) paper copy of the survey and postage-paid return envelope; and (3) a web link for completing the survey online. Email-based recruitment included an e-mail describing the survey and inviting participation, along with the web link to the survey, and a reminder postcard 2 weeks later. RESULTS: Response was higher for mail-based (11.8, 95% CI 11.0-12.6%) vs. email-based (4.5, 95% CI 4.0-5.0%) recruitment. In email-based recruitment, only one-quarter of recipients opened the email, and even fewer clicked on the link to complete the survey. Most physicians in mail-based recruitment responded after the first invitation (362 of 770 responders, 47.0%). A higher proportion of responders vs. non-responders were young (ages 25-44 years), men, and radiation or surgical (vs. medical) oncologists. CONCLUSIONS: Most physicians assigned to mail-based recruitment actually completed the survey online via the link provided in the cover letter, and those in email-based recruitment did not respond until they received a reminder postcard by mail. Providing the option to return a paper survey or complete it online may have further increased participation in the mail-based group, and future studies should examine how combinations of delivery mode and return options affect physicians' response to surveys.

Preferences for breast cancer survivorship care by rural/urban residence and age at diagnosis.

PURPOSE: Preferences for survivorship care among recently treated breast cancer survivors may vary by rural-urban residence and age, but potential differences have not been examined. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional survey of survivorship preferences among women treated for non-metastatic breast cancer 6-24 months prior to recruitment. RESULTS: We surveyed 203 women (66% response) with American Joint Committee on Cancer Stage I or II breast cancer. Rural residents comprised 36.5% of respondents (82.7% White, non-Hispanic; 52.5% < college education) and 29.6% were ≥ 65 years. More than 95% indicated that checking for recurrence, receiving additional treatment, evaluation of side effects, and identification of late effects were "very important" reasons for follow-up care. The most common topics identified as "very important" for survivorship care discussions were recommendations for healthy behaviors (65.3%), best sources for breast cancer information (65.3%), and effects on family (53.3%) and job (53.8%). Women 65 years and older preferred to discuss follow-up care at the time of diagnosis (p = 0.002), with younger women preferring during (32%) or after treatment (39.1%). Rural survivors were significantly more likely to identify follow-up care reasons not related to the initial breast cancer as "very important" than urban survivors, including screening for other cancers, and examinations or tests for non-cancer diseases (both p = 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Survivorship care in accordance with national recommendations will likely be accepted by breast cancer survivors. Tailoring breast cancer survivorship care by timing, integration of primary care services, and specific psychosocial topics may best meet the needs of different ages and demographics.

Care delivery, patient experiences, and health outcomes among sexual and gender minority patients with cancer and survivors: A scoping review.

Sexual and gender minorities (SGMs) face a disproportionate burden of cancer, yet little is known about the experiences and specific needs of these underserved populations in cancer care delivery. The authors conducted a scoping review to characterize the literature on cancer care delivery, health outcomes, and health care experiences for patients with cancer and survivors identifying as SGM. In total, 1176 peer-reviewed citations were identified after a systematic search of the PubMed/Medline, PsycInfo, Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), and Web of Sciences databases without restriction on publication date. The details captured included study aims, design, population, cancer site, and main findings. Thirty-seven studies published from 1998 to 2017 met the study criteria. Most studies were conducted in the post-treatment survivorship phase of the continuum (n = 30), and breast cancer was the most common cancer site (n = 20). There were only 2 intervention studies. The studies reviewed were classified under the following areas of focus: 1) disclosure of sexual orientation and gender identity, 2) quality of care, 3) psychosocial impact of/ adjustment to cancer, 4) social support, 5) sexual functioning, and 6) health risks/health behavior. Very little research reported an assessment of gender minority status or included a focus on gender minorities (n = 7). This review revealed substantial research gaps given a lack of population-based data and small sample sizes, likely related to the absence of systematic collection of sexual orientation and gender identity information in the cancer care context. Deficient research in this area likely perpetuates health disparities. Further research is needed to identify and remove the barriers to delivering high-quality care to SGM individuals with cancer.

Treatment and Survival Disparities in the National Cancer Institute's Patterns of Care Study (1987-2017).

BACKGROUND: Cancer health services research is a primary tool for analyzing the association between various factors, cancer health care delivery, and the resultant outcomes. To address disparities strategies must be developed to target factors that are related to differences in care; however, to date, most disparities studies have been descriptive. The primary objective was to describe cancer treatment and survival disparities in community oncology practice patterns found in the National Cancer Institute's population-based Patterns of Care (POC) Study (1987-2017). Secondarily, we compared POC findings to peer-reviewed literature. In POC data, older age was consistently associated with decreased odds of treatment and increased mortality. Interestingly, in contrast to current literature, few POC studies found race/ethnicity significantly predicted disparities. Cancer health disparities are complex; they are multifactorial, differ by cancer site and may wax and wane. The complexity supports the need for deeper understanding and targeted interventions to ensure equitable cancer care and outcomes.

Cancer Screening Test Use - United States, 2015.

Healthy People 2020 (HP2020) includes objectives to increase screening for breast, cervical, and colorectal cancer (1) as recommended by the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF).* Progress toward meeting these objectives is monitored by measuring cancer screening test use against national targets using data from the National Health Interview Survey (NHIS) (1). Analysis of 2015 NHIS data indicated that screening test use remains substantially below HP2020 targets for selected cancer screening tests. Although colorectal cancer screening test use increased from 2000 to 2015, no improvements in test use were observed for breast and cervical cancer screening. Disparities exist in screening test use by race/ethnicity, socioeconomic status, and health care access indicators. Increased measures to implement evidence-based interventions and conduct targeted outreach are needed if the HP2020 targets for cancer screening are to be achieved and the disparities in screening test use are to be reduced.

Comparison of cancer survival trends in the United States of adolescents and young adults with those in children and older adults.

BACKGROUND: With prior reports indicating a lack of progress in survival improvement in older adolescents and young adults (AYAs) aged 15 to 39 years with cancer compared with both younger and older patients with cancer, the current analysis provides an update of survival trends of cancers among AYAs, children, and older adults. METHODS: Data from the National Cancer Institute Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database for 13 regions were used to ascertain survival trends of the 34 most frequent cancers diagnosed in AYAs compared with children and older adults. RESULTS: As of 2002 through 2006, the 5-year relative survival rate for all invasive cancers in AYAs was 82.5% (standard error, 0.2%). In AYAs, 14 cancers demonstrated evidence of a statistically significant improvement in their 5-year relative survival since 1992. Survival improved less in AYAs than in children for acute myeloid leukemia and medulloblastoma. Fourteen cancers had survival improvements that were found to be less in AYAs compared with older adults, including hepatic carcinoma, acute myeloid leukemia, high-grade astrocytoma, acute lymphocytic leukemia, pancreatic carcinoma, low-grade astrocytoma, gastric carcinoma, renal carcinoma, cancer of the oral cavity and pharynx, Hodgkin lymphoma, ovarian cancer, fibromatous sarcoma, other soft tissue sarcoma, and thyroid carcinoma. CONCLUSIONS: Improvements in the survival of several cancer types that occur frequently in AYAs are encouraging. However, survival does not appear to be improving to the same extent in AYAs as in children or older adults for several cancers. Further investment in exploring the distinct biology of tumors in this age group, and of their hosts, must be a priority in AYA oncology.

Next steps for adolescent and young adult oncology workshop: An update on progress and recommendations for the future.

Each year, 70,000 adolescents and young adults (AYAs) between ages 15 and 39 years in the United States are diagnosed with cancer. In 2006, a National Cancer Institute (NCI) Progress Review Group (PRG) examined the state of science associated with cancer among AYAs. To assess the impact of the PRG and examine the current state of AYA oncology research, the NCI, with support from the LIVESTRONG Foundation, sponsored a workshop entitled "Next Steps in Adolescent and Young Adult Oncology" on September 16 and 17, 2013, in Bethesda, Maryland. This report summarizes the findings from the workshop, opportunities to leverage existing data, and suggestions for future research priorities. Multidisciplinary teams that include basic scientists, epidemiologists, trialists, biostatisticians, clinicians, behavioral scientists, and health services researchers will be essential for future advances for AYAs with cancer.

Oncotype Dx assay and breast cancer in the United States: usage and concordance with chemotherapy.

The 21-gene recurrence score (RS) assay (Oncotype DX™) predicts the likelihood of breast cancer recurrence and chemotherapy responsiveness. The aims of this study were to describe temporal trends in assay usage, to investigate factors associated with the receipt of the assay and to determine how the assay is associated with treatment decisions. Random samples of stage I-II female breast cancer patients diagnosed in 2004, 2005 and 2010 as reported to the National Cancer Institute's Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results program were included. Among women diagnosed in 2010 with estrogen receptor positive (ER+), lymph node-negative (LN-) tumors, factors associated with receipt of the assay were identified and the likelihood of chemotherapy by RS was estimated. Assay usage increased over time (ER+/LN-:8.0-27.0 %, p < 0.01; ER+/LN+: 2.0-15.7 %, p = 0.09; ER-: 0.2-1.7 %, p < 0.01) from 2005 to 2010. Receipt of the assay was associated with younger age, lower area income and tumor characteristics. Among women in the low (RS < 18) and high risk (RS > 30) categories, 3.3 and 95.9 % received chemotherapy, respectively. Within the intermediate risk group the receipt of chemotherapy varied: 12.8 % (RS: 18-19), 35.0 % (RS: 20-23) and 84.0 % (RS: 24-30). During the study years, assay usage increased among women for whom the assay is and is not guideline recommended. Factors such as insurance and race/ethnicity do not appear to be associated with the receipt of the assay. The RS, as determined broadly via three categories and within the intermediate risk group, does appear to influence chemotherapy decisions.

Geriatric assessment predicts survival for older adults receiving induction chemotherapy for acute myelogenous leukemia.

We investigated the predictive value of geriatric assessment (GA) on overall survival (OS) for older adults with acute myelogenous leukemia (AML). Consecutive patients ≥ 60 years with newly diagnosed AML and planned intensive chemotherapy were enrolled at a single institution. Pretreatment GA included evaluation of cognition, depression, distress, physical function (PF) (self-reported and objectively measured), and comorbidity. Objective PF was assessed using the Short Physical Performance Battery (SPPB, timed 4-m walk, chair stands, standing balance) and grip strength. Cox proportional hazards models were fit for each GA measure as a predictor of OS. Among 74 patients, the mean age was 70 years, and 78.4% had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) score ≤ 1. OS was significantly shorter for participants who screened positive for impairment in cognition and objectively measured PF. Adjusting for age, gender, ECOG score, cytogenetic risk group, myelodysplastic syndrome, and hemoglobin, impaired cognition (Modified Mini-Mental State Exam < 77) and impaired objective PF (SPPB < 9) were associated with worse OS. GA methods, with a focus on cognitive and PF, improve risk stratification and may inform interventions to improve outcomes for older AML patients.

Disparities in barriers to follow-up care between African American and White breast cancer survivors.

PURPOSE: Despite recommendations for breast cancer survivorship care, African American women are less likely to receive appropriate follow-up care, which is concerning due to their higher mortality rates. This study describes differences in barriers to follow-up care between African American and White breast cancer survivors. METHODS: We conducted a mailed survey of women treated for non-metastatic breast cancer in 2009-2011, 6-24 months post-treatment (N = 203). Survivors were asked about 14 potential barriers to follow-up care. We used logistic regression to explore associations between barriers and race, adjusting for covariates. RESULTS: Our participants included 31 African American and 160 White survivors. At least one barrier to follow-up care was reported by 62 %. Compared to White survivors, African Americans were more likely to identify barriers related to out-of-pocket costs (28 vs. 51.6 %, p = 0.01), other health care costs (21.3 vs. 45.2 %, p = 0.01), anxiety/worry (29.4 vs. 51.6 %, p = 0.02), and transportation (4.4 vs. 16.1 %, p = 0.03). After adjustment for covariates, African Americans were three times as likely to report at least one barrier to care (odds ratio (OR) = 3.3, 95 % confidence interval (CI) = 1.1-10.1). CONCLUSIONS: Barriers to care are common among breast cancer survivors, especially African American women. Financial barriers to care may prevent minority and underserved survivors from accessing follow-up care. Enhancing insurance coverage or addressing out-of-pocket costs may help address financial barriers to follow-up care among breast cancer survivors. Psychosocial care aimed at reducing fear of recurrence may also be important to improve access among African American breast cancer survivors.

Comprehensive evaluation of the incidence of late effects in 5-year survivors of breast cancer.

Late effects of breast cancer affect the quality of survivorship. Using administrative data, we compared the occurrence of almost all ICD9 codes among older breast cancer survivors to that among a matched comparison cohort to generate new hypotheses. Breast cancer patients 65 years or older diagnosed 1990-1994 in 6 integrated care settings and who survived at least 5 years were matched with a cohort of women without a history of breast cancer on care setting, age, and calendar time. We collected data on the occurrence of incident ICD9 codes beginning 6 years after the breast cancer diagnosis date and continuing to year 15, and comparable data for the matched woman. We calculated hazard ratios (HRs) and 95 % confidence intervals associating breast cancer survivorship with incidence of each ICD9 code. We used semi-Bayes methods to address multiple comparisons. Older breast cancer survivors had about the same occurrence of diseases and conditions 6-15 years after breast cancer diagnosis as comparable women. The median of 564 adjusted HRs equaled 1.06, with interquartile range 0.92-1.3. The distribution of HRs pertaining to cancer-related ICD codes was shifted toward positive associations, and the distribution pertaining to cardiovascular-related ICD codes was shifted toward negative associations. In this hypothesis-scanning study, we observed little difference in the occurrence of non-breast cancer-related diseases and conditions among older, long-term breast cancer survivors, and comparable women without a history of breast cancer.

Incident comorbidities and all-cause mortality among 5-year survivors of Stage I and II breast cancer diagnosed at age 65 or older: a prospective-matched cohort study.

Five-year breast cancer survivors, diagnosed after 65 years of age, may develop more incident comorbidities than similar populations free of cancer. We investigated whether older breast cancer survivors have a similar comorbidity burden 6-15 years after cancer diagnosis to matched women free of breast cancer at start of follow-up and whether incident comorbidities are associated with all-cause mortality. In this prospective cohort study, 1,361 older 5-year early-stage breast cancer survivors diagnosed between 1990 and 1994 and 1,361 age- and health system-matched women were followed for 10 years. Adjudicated medical record review captured prevalent and incident comorbidities during follow-up or until death as collected from the National Death Index. Older 5-year breast cancer survivors did not acquire incident comorbidities more often than matched women free of breast cancer in the subsequent 10 years [hazard ratio (HR) 1.0, 95 % confidence interval (95 % CI) 0.93, 1.1]. Adjusted for cohort membership, women with incident comorbidities had a higher mortality rate than those without incident comorbidities (HR 4.8, 95 % CI 4.1, 5.6). A breast cancer history continued to be a hazard for mortality 6-15 years after diagnosis (HR 1.3, 95 % CI 1.1, 1.4). We found that older breast cancer survivors who developed comorbidities had an increased all-cause mortality rate even after adjusting for age and prevalent comorbidity burden. Additionally, survivors acquire comorbidities at a rate similar to older women free of breast cancer. These results highlight the association between comorbidity burden and long-term mortality risk among older breast cancer survivors and their need for appropriate oncology and primary care follow-up.

An orientation to the US National Cancer plan for the research community.

The US National Cancer Act of 1971 designated the director of the National Cancer Institute as responsible for coordinating federal agencies and nonfederal organizations to make progress against cancer. As part of her role, the immediate past director of the National Cancer Institute (MMB) led the development of a National Cancer Plan that was formally released on April 3, 2023. The plan includes 8 aspirational goals "to achieve a society where every person with cancer lives a full and active life and to prevent most cancers so that few people need to face this diagnosis." Research findings provide a foundation for each goal, and research gaps are included in the strategies for meeting each goal. The President's Cancer Panel, also created by the National Cancer Act, conducted an initial assessment of progress toward the plan goals by hearing from 12 organizations at a virtual public meeting on September 7, 2023. The purpose of this commentary is to orient the scientific community to the plan and call attention to related knowledge gaps that could benefit from research.

Rural-urban disparities in health status among US cancer survivors.

BACKGROUND: Although rural residents are more likely to be diagnosed with more advanced cancers and to die of cancer, little is known about rural-urban disparities in self-reported health among survivors. METHODS: The authors identified adults who had a self-reported history of cancer from the National Health Interview Survey (2006-2010). Rural-urban residence was defined using US Census definitions. Logistic regression with weighting to account for complex sampling was used to assess rural-urban differences in health status after accounting for differences in demographic characteristics. RESULTS: Of the 7804 identified cancer survivors, 20.8% were rural residents. This translated to a population of 2.8 million rural cancer survivors in the United States. Rural survivors were more likely than urban survivors to be non-Hispanic white (P < .001), to have less education (P < .001), and to lack health insurance (P < .001). Rural survivors reported worse health in all domains. After adjustment for sex, race/ethnicity, age, marital status, education, insurance, time since diagnosis, and number of cancers, rural survivors were more likely to report fair/poor health (odds ratio, 1.39; 95% confidence interval, 1.20-1.62), psychological distress (odds ratio, 1.23; 95% confidence interval, 1.00-1.50), ≥2 noncancer comorbidities (odds ratio, 1.15; 95% confidence interval, 1.01-1.32), and health-related unemployment (odds ratio, 1.66; 95% confidence interval, 1.35-2.03). CONCLUSIONS: The current results provide the first estimates of the proportion and number of US adult cancer survivors who reside in rural areas. Rural cancer survivors are at greater risk for a variety of poor health outcomes, even many years after their cancer diagnosis, and should be a target for interventions to improve their health and well being.

Rural-urban differences in health behaviors and implications for health status among US cancer survivors.

PURPOSE: Rural US adults have increased risk of poor outcomes after cancer, including increased cancer mortality. Rural-urban differences in health behaviors have been identified in the general population and may contribute to cancer health disparities, but have not yet been examined among US survivors. We examined rural-urban differences in health behaviors among cancer survivors and associations with self-reported health and health-related unemployment. METHODS: We identified rural (n = 1,642) and urban (n = 6,162) survivors from the cross-sectional National Health Interview Survey (2006-2010) and calculated the prevalence of smoking, physical activity, overweight/obesity, and alcohol consumption. Multivariable models were used to examine the associations of fair/poor health and health-related unemployment with health behaviors and rural-urban residence. RESULTS: The prevalence of fair/poor health (rural 36.7 %, urban 26.6 %), health-related unemployment (rural 18.5 %, urban 10.6 %), smoking (rural 25.3 %, urban 15.8 %), and physical inactivity (rural 50.7 %, urban 38.7 %) was significantly higher in rural survivors (all p < .05); alcohol consumption was lower (rural 46.3 %, urban 58.6 %), and there were no significant differences in overweight/obesity (rural 65.4 %, urban 62.6 %). All health behaviors were significantly associated with fair/poor health and health-related unemployment in both univariate and multivariable models. After adjustment for behaviors, rural survivors remained more likely than urban survivors to report fair/poor health (OR = 1.21, 95 % CI 1.03-1.43) and health-related unemployment (OR = 1.49, 95 % CI 1.18-1.88). CONCLUSIONS: Rural survivors may need tailored, accessible health promotion interventions to address health-compromising behaviors and improve outcomes after cancer.

Morbidity and mortality in long-term survivors of Hodgkin lymphoma: a report from the Childhood Cancer Survivor Study.

The contribution of specific cancer therapies, comorbid medical conditions, and host factors to mortality risk after pediatric Hodgkin lymphoma (HL) is unclear. We assessed leading morbidities, overall and cause-specific mortality, and mortality risks among 2742 survivors of HL in the Childhood Cancer Survivor Study, a multi-institutional retrospective cohort study of survivors diagnosed from 1970 to 1986. Excess absolute risk for leading causes of death and cumulative incidence and standardized incidence ratios of key medical morbidities were calculated. Cox regression models were used to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) of risks for overall and cause-specific mortality. Substantial excess absolute risk of mortality per 10,000 person-years was identified: overall 95.5; death due to HL 38.3, second malignant neoplasms 23.9, and cardiovascular disease 13.1. Risks for overall mortality included radiation dose ≥ 3000 rad ( ≥ 30 Gy; supra-diaphragm: HR, 3.8; 95% CI, 1.1-12.6; infradiaphragm + supradiaphragm: HR, 7.8; 95% CI, 2.4-25.1), exposure to anthracycline (HR, 2.6; 95% CI, 1.6-4.3) or alkylating agents (HR, 1.7; 95% CI, 1.2-2.5), non-breast second malignant neoplasm (HR, 2.6; 95% CI 1.4-5.1), or a serious cardiovascular condition (HR, 4.4; 95% CI 2.7-7.3). Excess mortality from second neoplasms and cardiovascular disease vary by sex and persist > 20 years of follow-up in childhood HL survivors.

Racial/Ethnic disparities in health care receipt among male cancer survivors.

OBJECTIVES: We examined racial/ethnic disparities in health care receipt among a nationally representative sample of male cancer survivors. METHODS: We identified men aged 18 years and older from the 2006-2010 National Health Interview Survey who reported a history of cancer. We assessed health care receipt in 4 self-reported measures: primary care visit, specialist visit, flu vaccination, and pneumococcal vaccination. We used hierarchical logistic regression modeling, stratified by age (< 65 years vs ≥ 65 years). RESULTS: In adjusted models, older African American and Hispanic survivors were approximately twice as likely as were non-Hispanic Whites to not see a specialist (odds ratio [OR] = 1.78; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.19, 2.68 and OR = 2.09; 95% CI = 1.18, 3.70, respectively), not receive the flu vaccine (OR = 2.21; 95% CI = 1.45, 3.37 and OR = 2.20; 95% CI = 1.21, 4.01, respectively), and not receive the pneumococcal vaccine (OR = 2.24; 95% CI = 1.54, 3.24 and OR = 3.10; 95% CI = 1.75, 5.51, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Racial/ethnic disparities in health care receipt are evident among older, but not younger, cancer survivors, despite access to Medicare. These survivors may be less likely to see specialists, including oncologists, and receive basic preventive care.