Racial and socioeconomic disparities in lung cancer screening in the United States: A systematic review.

Nonsmall cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is the leading cause of cancer deaths. Lung cancer screening (LCS) reduces NSCLC mortality; however, a lack of diversity in LCS studies may limit the generalizability of the results to marginalized groups who face higher risk for and worse outcomes from NSCLC. Identifying sources of inequity in the LCS pipeline is essential to reduce disparities in NSCLC outcomes. The authors searched 3 major databases for studies published from January 1, 2010 to February 27, 2020 that met the following criteria: 1) included screenees between ages 45 and 80 years who were current or former smokers, 2) written in English, 3) conducted in the United States, and 4) discussed socioeconomic and race-based LCS outcomes. Eligible studies were assessed for risk of bias. Of 3721 studies screened, 21 were eligible. Eligible studies were evaluated, and their findings were categorized into 3 themes related to LCS disparities faced by Black and socioeconomically disadvantaged individuals: 1) eligibility; 2) utilization, perception, and utility; and 3) postscreening behavior and care. Disparities in LCS exist along racial and socioeconomic lines. There are several steps along the LCS pipeline in which Black and socioeconomically disadvantaged individuals miss the potential benefits of LCS, resulting in increased mortality. This study identified potential sources of inequity that require further investigation. The authors recommend the implementation of prospective trials that evaluate eligibility criteria for underserved groups and the creation of interventions focused on improving utilization and follow-up care to decrease LCS disparities.

Pilot study of a telehealth intervention for personalized self-management for eating symptoms after gastroesophageal cancer surgery.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Following gastric and esophageal cancer surgery, patients often experience significant, prolonged eating-related symptoms. One promising approach to help patients improve their eating-related quality of life (QOL) is through self-management coaching to aid in diet modification. We performed a randomized pilot study of a nutritionist-led telehealth intervention for the self-management of eating after gastroesophageal cancer surgery. METHODS: Patients who were within 30 days of resuming oral intake after undergoing surgery for gastric and/or esophageal cancer were consented and then randomized to the intervention or usual care. The intervention was performed by a nutritionist trained in self-management coaching and delivered in four telehealth sessions over 4 months. The following outcomes were measured at baseline and at 6 months after baseline: QOL (EORTC QLQC30), weight, body mass index, and sarcopenia. RESULTS: Fifty-three patients were enrolled. 22/27 usual care and 21/26 intervention patients completed the study for a retention rate of 81%. Differences between the intervention and control groups were not statistically significant, but the intervention group had indications of greater improvements in overall QOL as measured by EORTC QLQC30 Summary Score (8.7 vs. 2.3, p = 0.17) as well as greater improvements in 4/5 functional domains (p > 0.3). The intervention group also had slightly more weight gain (6 kg vs. 3 kg, p = 0.3) and less sarcopenia (3/16 vs. 9/18, p = 0.07). CONCLUSIONS: This pilot study demonstrated the feasibility and acceptability of a telehealth intervention for self-management of eating symptoms after gastroesophageal cancer surgery. There were trends toward improved overall QOL in the intervention group. A larger study is needed to validate the results.

Increasing clinician participation in tobacco cessation by an implementation science-based tobacco cessation champion program.

BACKGROUND: We designed a process to increase tobacco cessation in an academic center and its widely distributed network community sites using clinical champions to overcome referral barriers. METHODS: In 2020 a needs assessment was performed across the City of Hope Medical Center and its 32 community treatment sites. We reviewed information science strategies to choose elements for our expanded tobacco control plan, focusing on distributed leadership with tobacco cessation champions. We analyzed smoking patterns in patients with cancer before and following program implementation. We evaluated the champion experience and measured tobacco abstinence after 6 months of follow-up. RESULTS: Cancer center leadership committed to expanding tobacco control. Funding was obtained through a Cancer Center Cessation Initiative (C3I) grant. Multi-disciplinary leaders developed a comprehensive plan. Disease-focused clinics and community sites named cessation champions (a clinician and nurse) supported by certified tobacco treatment specialists. Patient, staff, clinician, and champion training/education were developed. Roles and responsibilities of the champions were defined. Implementation in pilot sites showed increased tobacco assessment from 80.8 to 96.6%, increased tobacco cessation referral by 367%, and moderate smoking abstinence in both academic (27.2%) and community sites (22.5%). 73% of champions had positive attitudes toward the program. CONCLUSION: An efficient process to expand smoking cessation in the City of Hope network was developed using implementation science strategies and cessation champions. This well-detailed implementation process may be helpful to other cancer centers, particularly those with a tertiary care cancer center and community network.

The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on care delivery and quality of life in lung cancer surgery.

BACKGROUND: The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) (COVID-19) pandemic and associated restrictions have altered the delivery of surgical care. The purpose of this study was to explore the impact of COVID-19 on care delivery and quality of life (QOL) from the perspectives of lung cancer surgery patients, family caregivers (FCGs), and thoracic surgery teams. METHODS: Patients/FCGs enrolled in a randomized trial of a self-management intervention for lung cancer surgery preparation/recovery were invited to participate in this qualitative study. Patients/FCGs data were collected separately 1-month postdischarge. Interviews were also conducted with thoracic surgery team members. Content analysis approaches were used to develop themes. RESULTS: Forty-one respondents including 19 patients, 18 FCGs, three thoracic surgeons, and one nurse practitioner participated in the study. Patient themes included isolation, psychological distress, delayed/impacted care, and financial impact. FCGs themes included caregiving challenges, worry about COVID-19, financial hardship, isolation, and physical activity limitations. Surgical team themes included witnessing patient/FCG's distress, challenges with telehealth, communication/educational challenges, and delays in treatment. CONCLUSIONS: COVID-19 had a varied impact on care delivery and QOL for lung cancer surgery dyads. Some dyads reported minimal impact, while others experienced added psychological distress, isolation, and caregiving challenges. Surgical teams also experienced challenges in the approach used to provide care.

Racial and Ethnic Bias Impact Perceptions of Surgeon Communication.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate patient satisfaction scores as a function of physician and patient race and sex. BACKGROUND: Patient satisfaction is increasingly used as a surrogate for physician performance. How patient and surgeon race and ethnicity affect perceptions of surgeon communication and care is not widely explored. METHODS: Press Ganey patient satisfaction surveys collected from January 2019 to September 2020 were studied. Multivariate logistic regressions were used to identify factors associated with favorable surgeon performance as a function of patient and surgeon demographics. RESULTS: A total of 4732 unique outpatient satisfaction survey responses were analyzed. The majority of patients were White (60.5%), followed by Asian (8.6%), Black (4.2%), and Hispanic (4.3%). URM accounted for 8.9% of the 79 surgeons evaluated, and 34% were female. Black, Hispanic, and Asian patients were more likely to report unfavorable experiences than their White counterparts (P < 0.01). Spanish-speaking patients were most likely to perceive that surgeon show less respect for patient concerns (13.9% vs 9.3%, P = 0.004) and inadequate time spent explaining health concerns (12.6% vs 9.2%, P < 0.001). Female surgeons were more likely to achieve the highest overall ratings for effective communication, whereas Asian surgeons received lower scores. Asian surgeons were more likely than non-Asian surgeons to receive lower scores in explanation (37.3% vs 44.1%, P = 0.003). After adjusting for confounding factors, Asian surgeons had 26% lower odds of receiving favorable scores for overall communication (odds ratio: 0.736, 95% confidence interval: 0.619-0.877, P = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Both patient and surgeon race and sex drive negative perceptions of patient-physician communication. As URM report more negative experiences, further studies should focus on effects of surgeon cultural awareness on underrepresented patient satisfaction.

Pilot study of a telehealth perioperative physical activity intervention for older adults with cancer and their caregivers.

BACKGROUND: Older adults undergoing cancer surgery are at greater risk for poor postoperative outcomes. Caregivers also endure significant burden. Participation in perioperative physical activity may improve physical functioning and enhance overall well-being for both patients and caregivers. In this study, we assessed the feasibility of a personalized telehealth intervention to enhance physical activity for older (≥ 65 years) gastrointestinal (GI) and lung cancer surgery patients/caregivers. METHODS: Participants completed four telehealth sessions with physical therapy/occupational therapy (PT/OT) before surgery and up to 2 weeks post-discharge. Outcomes included preop geriatric assessment, functional measures, and validated measures for symptoms and psychological distress. Pre/post-intervention trends/trajectories for outcomes were explored. RESULTS: Thirty-four patient/caregiver dyads (16, GI; 18, lung) were included. Accrual rate was 76% over 8 months; retention rate was 88% over 2 months. Median for postop of a 6-min walk test, timed up and go, and short physical performance battery test scores improved from baseline to postop. Participant satisfaction scores were high. CONCLUSION: Our conceptually based, personalized, multimodal, telehealth perioperative physical activity intervention for older patient/caregiver dyads is feasible and acceptable. It offers an opportunity to improve postoperative outcomes by promoting functional recovery through telehealth, behavior change, and self-monitoring approaches. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03267524.

Preparing Cancer Patients and Family Caregivers for Lung Surgery: Development of a Multimedia Self-Management Intervention.

The surgical treatment of lung malignancies often results in persistent symptoms, psychosocial distress, and decrements in quality of life (QOL) for cancer patients and their family caregivers (FCGs). The potential benefits of providing patients and FCGs with preparatory education that begins in the preoperative setting have been explored in multiple medical conditions, with positive impact observed on postoperative recovery, psychological distress, and QOL. However, few studies have explored the benefits of preparatory educational interventions to promote self-management in cancer surgery, including lung surgery. This paper describes the systematic approach used in the development of a multimedia self-management intervention to prepare cancer patients and their FCGs for lung surgery. Intervention development was informed by (1) contemporary published evidence on the impact of lung surgery on patients and FCG, (2) our previous research that explored QOL, symptoms, and caregiver burden after lung surgery, (3) the use of the chronic care self-management model (CCM) to guide intervention design, and (4) written comments and feedback from patients and FCGs that informed intervention development and refinement. Pilot-testing of the intervention is in process, and a future randomized trial will determine the efficacy of the intervention to improve patient, FCG, and system outcomes.

Bleeding risk associated with eptifibatide (Integrilin) bridging in thoracic surgery patients.

Antiplatelet use for treatment of coronary artery disease (CAD) is common amongst thoracic surgery patients. Perioperative management of antiplatelet agents requires balancing the opposing risks of myocardial ischemia and excessive bleeding. Perioperative bridging with short-acting intravenous antiplatelet agents has shown promise in preventing myocardial ischemia, but may increase bleeding. We sought to determine whether perioperative bridging with eptifibatide increased bleeding associated with thoracic surgery. After Institutional Review Board approval, we identified thoracic surgery patients receiving eptifibatide at our institution (n = 30). These patients were matched 1:2 with control patients with CAD who did not receive eptifibatide from an institutional database of general thoracic surgery patients. The primary endpoint for our study was the number of units of blood transfused perioperatively. There were no differences in our primary endpoint, number of units of blood products transfused. There were also no differences noted between groups in intraoperative blood loss, chest tube duration, or postoperative length of stay (LOS). While there were no difference noted in overall complications, including our outcome of perioperative MI or death, composite cardiovascular events were more common in the eptifibatide group. In our retrospective exploratory analysis, eptifibatide bridging in patients with high-risk or recent PCI was not associated with an increased need for perioperative transfusion, bleeding, or increased LOS. In addition, we found a similar rate of perioperative mortality or myocardial infarction in both groups, though the ability of eptifibatide to protect against perioperative myocardial ischemia is unclear given different baseline CAD characteristics.

Impact of pretreatment imaging on survival of esophagectomy after induction therapy for esophageal cancer: who should be given the benefit of the doubt?: esophagectomy outcomes of patients with suspicious metastatic lesions.

PURPOSE: We examined survival of patients who underwent esophagectomy for locally advanced esophageal cancer with foci that were suspicious for metastatic disease on initial imaging but whose disease did not progress after induction chemoradiation treatment (CRT). METHODS: The impact of pre- and posttherapy staging characteristics on survival of patients who underwent esophagectomy after CRT between 2003 and 2009 was evaluated using multivariable logistic regression. Survival of patients with and without possible metastatic disease on initial imaging was compared with the log-rank test. RESULTS: During the study period, 71 (32%) of 220 patients who underwent CRT followed by esophagectomy had possible distant metastatic disease on initial imaging. Patients with initial suspicion of metastases had a 5-year survival of 24.8%. Overall survival of patients with and without possible metastatic disease on initial imaging was not significantly different (p = 0.4), but pretreatment positron emission tomography (PET) suggesting a liver lesion (hazard ratio [HR] 3.2, p = 0.003) predicted worse survival. Additional predictors of worse survival were clinical T4 status (HR 3.1, p = 0.001), post-CRT pathologic nodal status (HR 1.6, p = 0.04), and pathologically confirmed metastatic disease at or before resection (HR 3.1, p = 0.01). None of 10 patients with pathologic metastatic disease at resection lived longer than 2.5 years. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with possible liver metastases on pretreatment PET and patients with confirmed metastatic disease at the time of surgery do not benefit from resection. However, patients with pretreatment imaging that shows possible metastatic disease in sites other than the liver still have reasonable long-term survival after resection.

Structural Racism and Lung Cancer Risk: A Scoping Review.

Importance: Structural racism is associated with persistent inequities in health and health outcomes in the US for racial and ethnic minority groups. This review summarizes how structural racism contributes to differential population-level exposure to lung cancer risk factors and thus disparate lung cancer risk across different racial and ethnic groups. Observations: A scoping review was conducted focusing on structural racism and lung cancer risk for racial and ethnic minority groups. The domains of structural racism evaluated included housing and built environment, occupation and employment, health care, economic and educational opportunity, private industry, perceived stress and discrimination, and criminal justice involvement. The PubMed, Embase, and MedNar databases were searched for English-language studies in the US from January 1, 2010, through June 30, 2022. The review demonstrated that racial and ethnic minority groups are more likely to have environmental exposures to air pollution and known carcinogens due to segregation of neighborhoods and poor housing quality. In addition, racial and ethnic minority groups were more likely to have exposures to pesticides, silica, and asbestos secondary to higher employment in manual labor occupations. Furthermore, targeted marketing and advertisement of tobacco products by private industry were more likely to occur in neighborhoods with more racial and ethnic minority groups. In addition, poor access to primary care services and inequities in insurance status were associated with elevated lung cancer risk among racial and ethnic minority groups. Lastly, inequities in tobacco use and cessation services among individuals with criminal justice involvement had important implications for tobacco use among Black and Hispanic populations. Conclusions and Relevance: The findings suggest that structural racism must be considered as a fundamental contributor to the unequal distribution of lung cancer risk factors and thus disparate lung cancer risk across different racial and ethnic groups. Additional research is needed to better identify mechanisms contributing to inequitable lung cancer risk and tailor preventive interventions.

Spatial iTME analysis of KRAS mutant NSCLC and immunotherapy outcome.

We conducted spatial immune tumor microenvironment (iTME) profiling using formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded (FFPE) samples of 25 KRAS-mutated non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs), including 12 responders and 13 non-responders. An eleven-marker panel (CD3, CD4, CD8, FOXP3, CD68, arginase-1, CD33, HLA-DR, pan-keratin (PanCK), PD-1, and PD-L1) was used to study the tumor and immune cell compositions. Spatial features at single cell level with cellular neighborhoods and fractal analysis were determined. Spatial features and different subgroups of CD68+ cells and FOXP3+ cells being associated with response or resistance to ICIs were also identified. In particular, CD68+ cells, CD33+ and FOXP3+ cells were found to be associated with resistance. Interestingly, there was also significant association between non-nuclear expression of FOXP3 being resistant to ICIs. We identified CD68dim cells in the lung cancer tissues being associated with improved responses, which should be insightful for future studies of tumor immunity.

Access to Lung Cancer Screening.

Rural and racial/ethnic minority communities experience higher risk and mortality from lung cancer. Lung cancer screening with low-dose computed tomography reduces mortality. However, disparities persist in the uptake of lung cancer screening, especially in marginalized communities. Barriers to lung cancer screening are multilevel and include patient, provider, and system-level barriers. This discussion highlights the key barriers faced by rural and racial/ethnic minority communities.

Social determinants of health and lung cancer surgery: a qualitative study.

Introduction: Social determinants of health (SDOH) are non-clinical factors that may affect the outcomes of cancer patients. The purpose of this study was to describe the influence of SDOH factors on quality of life (QOL)-related outcomes for lung cancer surgery patients. Methods: Thirteen patients enrolled in a randomized trial of a dyadic self-management intervention were invited and agreed to participate in semi-structured key informant interviews at study completion (3 months post-discharge). A conventional content analysis approach was used to identify codes and themes that were derived from the interviews. Independent investigators coded the qualitative data, which were subsequently confirmed by a second group of independent investigators. Themes were finalized, and discrepancies were reviewed and resolved. Results: Six themes, each with several subthemes, emerged. Overall, most participants were knowledgeable about the concept of SDOH and perceived that provider awareness of SDOH information was important for the delivery of comprehensive care in surgery. Some participants described financial challenges during treatment that were exacerbated by their cancer diagnosis and resulted in stress and poor QOL. The perceived impact of education varied and included its importance in navigating the healthcare system, decision-making on health behaviors, and more economic mobility opportunities. Some participants experienced barriers to accessing healthcare due to insurance coverage, travel burden, and the fear of losing quality insurance coverage due to retirement. Neighborhood and built environment factors such as safety, air quality, access to green space, and other environmental factors were perceived as important to QOL. Social support through families/friends and spiritual/religious communities was perceived as important to postoperative recovery. Discussion: Among lung cancer surgery patients, SDOH factors can impact QOL and the patient's survivorship journey. Importantly, SDOH should be assessed routinely to identify patients with unmet needs across the five domains. SDOH-driven interventions are needed to address these unmet needs and to improve the QOL and quality of care for lung cancer surgery patients.

Neighborhood disadvantage is associated with KRAS-mutated non-small cell lung cancer risk.

PURPOSE: It remains unclear why individuals living in disadvantaged neighborhoods have shorter non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) survival. It is possible that living in these deprived areas is linked with increased risk of developing aggressive NSCLC biology. Here, we explored the association of somatic KRAS mutations, which are associated with shorter survival in NSCLC patients, and 11 definitions of neighborhood disadvantage spanning socioeconomic and structural environmental elements. METHODS: We analyzed data from 429 NSCLC patients treated at a Comprehensive Cancer Center from 2015 to 2018. Data were abstracted from medical records and each patient's home address was used to assign publicly available indices of neighborhood disadvantage. Prevalence Ratios (PRs) for the presence of somatic KRAS mutations were estimated using modified Poisson regression models adjusted for age, sex, smoking status, race/ethnicity, educational attainment, cancer stage, and histology. RESULTS: In the NSCLC cohort, 29% had KRAS mutation-positive tumors. We found that five deprivation indices of socioeconomic disadvantage were associated with KRAS mutation. A one decile increase in several of these socioeconomic disadvantage indices was associated with a 1.06 to 1.14 increased risk of KRAS mutation. Measures of built structural environment were not associated with KRAS mutation status. CONCLUSION: Socioeconomic disadvantage at the neighborhood level is associated with higher risk of KRAS mutation while disadvantage related to built environmental structural measures was inversely associated. Our results indicate not only that neighborhood disadvantage may contribute to aggressive NSCLC biology, but the pathways linking biology to disadvantage are likely operating through socioeconomic-related stress.

Social determinants of health among family caregiver centered outcomes in lung cancer: a systematic review.

Background: Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer death globally. Both lung cancer patients and family caregivers (FCGs) have unmet quality of life (QOL) needs. An understudied topic in lung cancer research is the role of social determinants of health (SDOH) on QOL outcomes for this population. The purpose of this review was to explore the state of research on SDOH FCGs centered outcomes in lung cancer. Methods: The databases PubMed/MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, and American Psychological Association (APA) PsycInfo were searched for peer-reviewed manuscripts evaluating defined SDOH domains on FCGs published within the last ten years. The information extracted using Covidence included patients, FCGs and study characteristics. Level of evidence and quality of articles were assessed using the Johns Hopkins Nursing Evidence-Based Practice Rating Scale. Results: Of the 344 full-text articles assessed, 19 were included in this review. The social and community context domain focused on caregiving stressors and interventions to reduce its effects. The health care access and quality domain showed barriers and underuse of psychosocial resources. The economic stability domain indicated marked economic burdens for FCGs. Four interconnected themes emerged among articles on the influence of SDOH on FCG-centered outcomes in lung cancer: (I) psychological well-being, (II) overall quality of life, (III) relationship quality, and (IV) economic hardship. Notably, most participants in the studies were White females. The tools used to measure SDOH factors included primarily demographic variables. Conclusions: Current studies provide evidence on the role of SDOH factors on lung cancer FCGs' QOL. Expanded utilization of validated SDOH measures in future studies would provide greater consistency in data, that could in turn inform interventions to improve QOL. Further research focusing on the domains of education quality and access and neighborhood and built environment should be carried out to bridge gaps in knowledge.

Neighborhood-level socioeconomic determinants impact outcomes in nonsmall cell lung cancer patients in the Southeastern United States.

BACKGROUND: Studies examining the impact of lower socioeconomic status (SES) on the outcomes of patients with nonsmall cell lung cancer (NSCLC) are inconsistent. The objective of this study was to clearly elucidate the association between SES, education, and clinical outcomes among patients with NSCLC. METHODS: The study population was derived from a consecutive, retrospective cohort of patients with NSCLC who received treatment within the Duke Health System between 1995 and 2007. SES determinants were based on the individual's census tract and corresponding 2000 Census data. Determinants included the percentage of the population living below poverty, the median household income, and the percentages of residents with at least a high school diploma and at least a bachelor's degree. The SES and educational variables were divided into quartiles. Statistical comparisons were performed using the 25th and 75th percentiles. RESULTS: Individuals who resided in areas with a low median household income or in which a high percentage of residents were living below the poverty line had a shorter cancer-specific 6-year survival than individuals who resided in converse areas (P = .0167 and P = .0067, respectively). Those living in areas in which a higher percentage of residents achieved a high school diploma had improved disease outcomes compared with those living in areas in which a lower percentage attained a high school diploma (P = .0033). A survival advantage also was observed for inhabitants of areas in which a higher percentage of residents attained a bachelor's degree (P = .0455). CONCLUSIONS: Low SES was identified as an independent prognostic factor for poor survival in patients with both early and advanced stage NSCLC. Patients who lived in areas with high poverty levels, low median incomes, and low education levels had worse mortality.

Calling Attention to the Role of Race-Driven Societal Determinants of Health on Aggressive Tumor Biology: A Focus on Black Americans.

Blacks have the highest incidence and mortality from most cancers. The reasons for these disparities remain unclear. Blacks are exposed to adverse social determinants because of historic and contemporary racist polices; however, how these determinants affect the disparities that Blacks experience is understudied. As a result of discriminatory community policies, like redlining, Blacks have higher exposure to air pollution and neighborhood deprivation. Studies investigating how these factors affect tumor biology are emerging. We highlight the literature that connects racism-related community exposure to the tumor biology in breast, lung, prostate, and colorectal cancer. Further investigations that clarify the link between adverse social determinants that result from systemic racism and aggressive tumor biology are required if health equity is to be achieved. Without recognition that racism is a public health risk with carcinogenic impact, health care delivery and cancer care will never achieve excellence. In response, health systems ought to establish corrective actions to improve Black population health and bring medical justice to marginalized racialized groups.

Health Disparities in Recruitment and Enrollment in Research.

Despite advances in thoracic oncology research, the benefits of new discoveries are not universally experienced. A lack of representation of racial/ethnic minorities and individuals of low socioeconomic status in clinical trials and thoracic research contributes to persistent health care disparities. It is critical that improved racial, ethnic, and socioeconomic diversity is achieved in our trials and research, if we are to attain generalizability of findings and reduction of health care disparities. Culturally tailored and community-based approaches can help improve recruitment and enrollment of marginalized groups in thoracic research, which is an essential step toward achieving health equity and advancing medical science.

Neighborhood disadvantage and lung cancer risk in a national cohort of never smoking Black women.

BACKGROUND: Compared to women of other races who have never smoked, Black women have a higher risk of lung cancer. Whether neighborhood disadvantage, which Black women experience at higher rates than other women, is linked to never-smoking lung cancer risk remains unclear. This study investigates the association of neighborhood disadvantage and lung cancer risk in Black never-smoking women. METHODS AND MATERIALS: This research utilized data from the Black Women's Health Study, a prospective cohort of 59,000 Black women recruited from across the US in 1995 and followed by biennial questionnaires. Associations of lung cancer incidence with neighborhood-level factors (including two composite variables derived from Census Bureau data: neighborhood socioeconomic status and neighborhood concentrated disadvantage), secondhand smoke exposure, and PM2.5 were estimated using Fine-Gray subdistribution hazard models. RESULTS: Among 37,650 never-smokers, 77 were diagnosed with lung cancer during follow-up from 1995 to 2018. The adjusted subdistribution hazard ratio (sHR) of lung cancer incidence with ten unit increase in neighborhood concentrated disadvantage index was 1.30 (95 % CI: 1.04, 1.63, p = 0.023). Exposure to secondhand smoke at work was associated with increased risk (sHR = 1.93, 95 % CI: 1.21, 3.10, p = 0.006), but exposure to secondhand smoke at home and PM2.5 was not. CONCLUSION: Worse neighborhood concentrated disadvantage was associated with increased lung cancer risk in Black women who never smoked. These findings suggest that non-tobacco-related factors in disadvantaged neighborhoods may be linked to lung cancer risk in Black women and that these factors must be understood and targeted to achieve health equity.

Machine learning to refine prognostic and predictive nodal burden thresholds for post-operative radiotherapy in completely resected stage III-N2 non-small cell lung cancer.

BACKGROUND: The role of post-operative radiotherapy (PORT) for completely resected N2 non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is controversial in light of recent randomized data. We sought to utilize machine learning to identify a subset of patients who may still benefit from PORT based on extent of nodal involvement. MATERIALS/METHODS: Patients with completely resected N2 NSCLC were identified in the National Cancer Database. We trained a machine-learning based model of overall survival (OS). SHapley Additive exPlanation (SHAP) values were used to identify prognostic and predictive thresholds of number of positive lymph nodes (LNs) involved and lymph node ratio (LNR). Cox proportional hazards regression was used for confirmatory analysis. RESULTS: A total of 16,789 patients with completely resected N2 NSCLC were identified. Using the SHAP values, we identified thresholds of 3+ positive LNs and a LNR of 0.34+. On multivariate analysis, PORT was not significantly associated with OS (p = 0.111). However, on subset analysis of patients with 3+ positive LNs, PORT improved OS (HR: 0.91; 95% CI: 0.86-0.97; p = 0.002). On a separate subset analysis in patients with a LNR of 0.34+, PORT improved OS (HR: 0.90; 95% CI: 0.85-0.96; p = 0.001). Patients with 3+ positive lymph nodes had a 5-year OS of 38% with PORT compared to 31% without PORT. Patient with positive lymph node ratio 0.34+ had a 5-year OS of 38% with PORT compared to 29% without PORT. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with a high lymph node burden or lymph node ratio may present a subpopulation of patients who could benefit from PORT. To our knowledge, this is the first study to use machine learning algorithms to address this question with a large national dataset. These findings address an important question in the field of thoracic oncology and warrant further investigation in prospective studies.