Guideline-concordant breast cancer care by patient race and ethnicity accounting for individual-, facility- and area-level characteristics: a SEER-Medicare study.

PURPOSE: To examine racial-ethnic variation in adherence to established quality metrics (NCCN guidelines and ASCO quality metrics) for breast cancer, accounting for individual-, facility-, and area-level factors. METHODS: Data from women diagnosed with invasive breast cancer at 66+ years of age from 2000 to 2017 were examined using SEER-Medicare. Associations between race and ethnicity and guideline-concordant diagnostics, locoregional treatment, systemic therapy, documented stage, and oncologist encounters were estimated using multilevel logistic regression models to account for clustering within facilities or counties. RESULTS: Black and American Indian/Alaska Native (AIAN) women had consistently lower odds of guideline-recommended care than non-Hispanic White (NHW) women (Diagnostic workup: ORBlack 0.83 (0.79-0.88), ORAIAN 0.66 (0.54-0.81); known stage: ORBlack 0.87 (0.80-0.94), ORAIAN 0.63 (0.47-0.85); seeing an oncologist: ORBlack 0.75 (0.71-0.79), ORAIAN 0.60 (0.47-0.72); locoregional treatment: ORBlack 0.80 (0.76-0.84), ORAIAN 0.84 (0.68-1.02); systemic therapies: ORBlack 0.90 (0.83-0.98), ORAIAN 0.66 (0.48-0.91)). Commission on Cancer accreditation and facility volume were significantly associated with higher odds of guideline-concordant diagnostics, stage, oncologist visits, and systemic therapy. Black residential segregation was associated with significantly lower odds of guideline-concordant locoregional treatment and systemic therapy. Rurality and area SES were associated with significantly lower odds of guideline-concordant diagnostics and oncologist visits. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first study to examine guideline-concordance across the continuum of breast cancer care from diagnosis to treatment initiation. Disparities were present from the diagnostic phase and persisted throughout the clinical course. Facility and area characteristics may facilitate or pose barriers to guideline-adherent treatment and warrant future investigation as mediators of racial-ethnic disparities in breast cancer care.

Effect of rurality and travel distance on contralateral prophylactic mastectomy for unilateral breast cancer.

PURPOSE: Despite lack of survival benefit, demand for contralateral prophylactic mastectomy (CPM) to treat unilateral breast cancer remains high. High uptake of CPM has been demonstrated in Midwestern rural women. Greater travel distance for surgical treatment is associated with CPM. Our objective was to examine the relationship between rurality and travel distance to surgery with CPM. METHODS: Women diagnosed with stages I-III unilateral breast cancer between 2007 and 2017 were identified using the National Cancer Database. Logistic regression was used to model likelihood of CPM based on rurality, proximity to metropolitan centers, and travel distance. A multinomial logistic regression model compared factors associated with CPM with reconstruction versus other surgical options. RESULTS: Both rurality (OR 1.10, 95% CI 1.06-1.15 for non-metro/rural vs. metro) and travel distance (OR 1.37, 95% CI 1.33-1.41 for those who traveled 50 + miles vs. < 30 miles) were independently associated with CPM. For women who traveled 30 + miles, odds of receiving CPM were highest for non-metro/rural women (OR 1.33 for 30-49 miles, OR 1.57 for 50 + miles; reference: metro women traveling < 30 miles). Non-metro/rural women who received reconstruction were more likely to undergo CPM regardless of travel distance (ORs 1.11-1.21). Both metro and metro-adjacent women who received reconstruction were more likely to undergo CPM only if they traveled 30 + miles (ORs 1.24-1.30). CONCLUSION: The impact of travel distance on likelihood of CPM varies by patient rurality and receipt of reconstruction. Further research is needed to understand how patient residence, travel burden, and geographic access to comprehensive cancer care services, including reconstruction, influence patient decisions regarding surgery.

Measuring and addressing health equity: an assessment of cancer center designation requirements.

PURPOSE: By requiring specific measures, cancer endorsements (e.g., accreditations, designations, certifications) promote high-quality cancer care. While 'quality' is the defining feature, less is known about how these endorsements consider equity. Given the inequities in access to high-quality cancer care, we assessed the extent to which equity structures, processes, and outcomes were required for cancer center endorsements. METHODS: We performed a content analysis of medical oncology, radiation oncology, surgical oncology, and research hospital endorsements from the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO), American Society of Radiation Oncology (ASTRO), American College of Surgeons Commission on Cancer (CoC), and the National Cancer Institute (NCI), respectively. We analyzed requirements for equity-focused content and compared how each endorsing body included equity as a requirement along three axes: structures, processes, and outcomes. RESULTS: ASCO guidelines centered on processes assessing financial, health literacy, and psychosocial barriers to care. ASTRO guidelines related to language needs and processes to address financial barriers. CoC equity-related guidelines focused on processes addressing financial and psychosocial concerns of survivors, and hospital-identified barriers to care. NCI guidelines considered equity related to cancer disparities research, inclusion of diverse groups in outreach and clinical trials, and diversification of investigators. None of the guidelines explicitly required measures of equitable care delivery or outcomes beyond clinical trial enrollment. CONCLUSION: Overall, equity requirements were limited. Leveraging the influence and infrastructure of cancer quality endorsements could enhance progress toward achieving cancer care equity. We recommend that endorsing organizations 1) require cancer centers to implement processes for measuring and tracking health equity outcomes and 2) engage diverse community stakeholders to develop strategies for addressing discrimination.

Comparing COVID-19 Response Behaviors between a Cancer Patient Sample and a Population-Based Cancer-Free Sample in a Rural Midwestern State.

INTRODUCTION: The COVID-19 pandemic caused an increase in fear, anxiety, and depressive symptoms globally. For populations at increased risk for adverse outcomes due to illness, such as cancer patients, these worries may have been exacerbated. Understanding how the pandemic impacted cancer patients will inform better preparation for future events that cause disturbances to cancer care delivery. METHODS: This study analyzed data from two surveys to determine whether cancer patients' responses differed from a cancer-free population-based sample in terms of concerns, preventive behaviors, and thoughts on their healthcare provider's communication regarding COVID-19 in a US Midwestern state. In August 2020, a survey was sent to 10,009 Iowans aged 18 and older, randomly selected from the 2018 Iowa voter registration file. In September 2020, a survey was emailed to 2,954 cancer patients aged 18 and older who opted into the University of Iowa Holden Comprehensive Cancer Center's Patients Enhancing Research Collaborations at Holden program. Previously validated and pretested Likert-type and multiple-choice items assessed concern regarding COVID-19, social distancing perception and behaviors, and demographic characteristics of respondents. We used χ2 tests and logistic regression to examine differences between the cancer patient and general population survey responses. RESULTS: We included 3,622 responses from the general population survey and 780 responses from the cancer patient survey in this analysis. Cancer patient survey respondents were more frequently older, lived in urban areas, had Medicare insurance coverage, had a college degree or higher, and were married. Cancer patients were more likely to report engaging in social distancing behaviors and greater concern regarding the pandemic. CONCLUSION: This study suggests differences in the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on cancer patients compared to cancer-free members of the general population. These results indicate the need for consideration of cancer patients' physical and mental health during large-scale disruptions to cancer care.

Causal decomposition maps: An exploratory tool for designing area-level interventions aimed at reducing health disparities.

Methods for decomposition analyses have been developed to partition between-group differences into explained and unexplained portions. In this paper, we introduce the concept of causal decomposition maps, which allow researchers to test the effect of area-level interventions on disease maps before implementation. These maps quantify the impact of interventions that aim to reduce differences in health outcomes between groups and illustrate how the disease map might change under different interventions. We adapt a new causal decomposition analysis method for the disease mapping context. Through the specification of a Bayesian hierarchical outcome model, we obtain counterfactual small area estimates of age-adjusted rates and reliable estimates of decomposition quantities. We present two formulations of the outcome model, with the second allowing for spatial interference of the intervention. Our method is utilized to determine whether the addition of gyms in different sets of rural ZIP codes could reduce any of the rural-urban difference in age-adjusted colorectal cancer incidence rates in Iowa ZIP codes.

Well-being and stress vulnerability in ovarian cancer survivors during the COVID-19 pandemic.

OBJECTIVE: This study was designed to examine (1) whether ovarian cancer (OC) survivors would have greater well-being vs. elevated distress compared to community members during a universal health stressor (COVID-19) and (2) how resources and risk factors at diagnosis predicted vulnerability to a subsequent health-related stressor. METHODS: One hundred seventeen OC survivors were recruited from two academic medical centers and compared to a community-based sample on COVID-related distress and disruption. Latent class analysis identified differentially impacted groups of survivors. RESULTS: Survivors reported lower distress than community members. Predictors of higher distress included shorter-term survivorship, greater disruption, and poorer emotional well--being (EWB) at diagnosis. Survivors were divided into high- and low-COVID-19-impact subgroups; high-impact individuals endorsed higher perceived stress and lower EWB at diagnosis. CONCLUSION: Survivors reported lower COVID-related distress than community participants. While depression at diagnosis did not predict later distress, EWB was a strong predictor of response to a novel health-related stressor.

Influence of rurality on lymph node assessment among women diagnosed with ductal carcinoma in situ and treated with mastectomy, SEER 2000-2015.

PURPOSE: Despite recommendations from national organizations supporting the use of lymph node assessment (LNA) among patients with ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) at time of mastectomy, variation in practice patterns across the United States has been observed. However, few studies have evaluated LNA differences and rurality. METHODS: Data from the SEER Patterns of Care studies were used to identify women who underwent mastectomy for newly diagnosed DCIS during 2000, 2005, 2010, and 2015. Weighted multivariate logistic regression was used to evaluate the association between rural-urban residence and the use of LNA. A subgroup analysis was performed comparing the use of axillary lymph node dissection (ALND) versus sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB). RESULTS: Of the 504 patients included in the analysis, approximately 81% underwent LNA at time of mastectomy with lower rates of use observed among rural patients (66%) versus urban patients (82%). In multivariate analysis, LNA increased over time (p < 0.0001), and rural patients were less likely to receive LNA compared to urban patients [adjusted odds ratio (aOR) = 0.19; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.06-0.66]. However, the likelihood of undergoing ALND relative to SLNB was lower among rural compared to urban patients (aOR = 0.16; 95% CI 0.03-0.73). CONCLUSIONS: Over time, the use of LNA with mastectomy has increased among DCIS patients. However, significant rural-urban differences in the use and type of LNA persist. The findings of this study highlight the importance of continued research aimed at examining the impact of rurality on the receipt of high-quality cancer care.

The Impact of Commission on Cancer Accreditation Status, Hospital Rurality and Hospital Size on Quality Measure Performance Rates.

BACKGROUND: Rural cancer patients receive lower-quality care and experience worse outcomes than urban patients. Commission on Cancer (CoC) accreditation requires hospitals to monitor performance on evidence-based quality measuresPlease confirm the list of authors is correc, but the impact of accreditation is not clear due to lack of data from non-accredited facilities and confounding between patient rurality and hospital accreditation, rurality, and size. METHODS: This retrospective, observational study assessed associations between rurality, accreditation, size, and performance rates for four CoC quality measures (breast radiation, breast chemotherapy, colon chemotherapy, colon nodal yield). Iowa Cancer Registry data were queried to identify all eligible patients diagnosed between 2011 and 2017. Cases were assigned to the surgery hospital to calculate performance rates. Univariate and multivariate regression models were fitted to identify patient- and hospital-level predictors and assess trends. RESULTS: The study cohort included 10,381 patients; 46% were rural. Compared with urban patients, rural patients more often received treatment at small, rural, and non-accredited facilities (p < 0.001 for all). Rural hospitals had fewer beds and were far less likely to be CoC-accredited than urban hospitals (p < 0.001 for all). On multivariate analysis, CoC accreditation was the strongest, independent predictor of higher hospital performance for all quality measures evaluated (p < 0.05 in each model). Performance rates significantly improved over time only for the colon nodal yield quality measure, and only in urban hospitals. CONCLUSIONS: CoC accreditation requires monitoring and evaluating performance on quality measures, which likely contributes to better performance on these measures. Efforts to support rural hospital accreditation may improve existing disparities in rural cancer treatment and outcomes.

Telehealth Utilization Is Associated with Lower Risk of Discontinuation of Buprenorphine: a Retrospective Cohort Study of US Veterans.

OBJECTIVE: Treatment for opioid use disorder (OUD) may include a combination of pharmacotherapies (such as buprenorphine) with counseling services if clinically indicated. Medication management or engagement with in-person counseling services may be hindered by logistical and financial barriers. Telehealth may provide an alternative mechanism for continued engagement. This study aimed to evaluate the association between telehealth encounters and time to discontinuation of buprenorphine treatment when compared to traditional in-person visits and to evaluate potential effect modification by rural-urban designation and in-person and telehealth combination treatment. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study of Veterans diagnosed with OUD and treated with buprenorphine across all facilities within the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) between 2008 and 2017. Exposures were telehealth and in-person encounters for substance use disorder (SUD) and mental health, treated as time-varying covariates. The primary outcome was treatment discontinuation, evaluated as 14 days of absence of medication from initiation through 1 year. RESULTS: Compared to in-person encounters, treatment discontinuation was lower for telehealth for SUD (aHR: 0.69; 95%CI: 0.60, 0.78) and mental health (aHR: 0.69; 95%CI: 0.62, 0.76). There was no evidence of effect modification by rural-urban designation. Risk of treatment discontinuation appeared to be lower among those with telehealth only compared to in-person only for both SUD (aHR: 0.48, 95%CI: 0.37, 0.62) and for mental health (aHR: 0.46; 95%CI: 0.33, 0.65). CONCLUSIONS: As telehealth demonstrated improved treatment retention compared to in-person visits, it may be a suitable option for engagement for patients in OUD management. Efforts to expand services may improve treatment retention and health outcomes for VHA and other health care systems.

Gynecologic oncologist impact on adjuvant chemotherapy care for stage II-IV ovarian cancer patients.

OBJECTIVE: We aim to evaluate the impact gynecologic oncologists have on ovarian cancer adjuvant chemotherapy care from their role as surgeons recommending adjuvant chemotherapy care and their role as adjuvant chemotherapy providers while considering rural-urban differences. METHODS: Multivariable adjusted logistic regressions and Cox proportional hazards models were developed using a population-based, retrospective cohort of stage II-IV and unknown stage ovarian cancer patients diagnosed in Iowa, Kansas, and Missouri in 2010-2012 whose medical records were abstracted in 2017-2018. RESULTS: Gynecologic oncologist surgeons (versus other type of surgeon) were associated with increased odds of adjuvant chemotherapy initiation (adjusted odds ratio (OR) 2.18; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.10-4.33) and having a gynecologic oncologist adjuvant chemotherapy provider (OR 10.0; 95% CI 4.58-21.8). Independent of type of surgeon, rural patients were less likely to have a gynecologic oncologist chemotherapy provider (OR 0.52; 95% CI 0.30-0.91). Gynecologic oncologist adjuvant chemotherapy providers (versus other providers) were associated with decreased surgery-to-chemotherapy time (rural: 6 days; urban: 8 days) and increased distance to chemotherapy (rural: 22 miles; urban: 11 miles). Rural women (versus urban) traveled 38 miles farther when their chemotherapy provider was a gynecologic oncologist and 27 miles farther when it was not. CONCLUSION: Gynecologic oncologist surgeons may impact adjuvant chemotherapy initiation. Gynecologic oncologists serving as adjuvant chemotherapy providers were associated with some care benefits, such as reduced time from surgery-to-chemotherapy, and some care barriers, such as travel distance. The barriers and benefits of having a gynecologic oncologist involved in adjuvant chemotherapy care, including rural-urban differences, warrant further research in other populations.

Referrals and Decision-Making Considerations Involved in Selecting a Surgeon for Rectal Cancer Treatment in the Midwestern United States.

BACKGROUND: Despite evidence of superior outcomes for rectal cancer at high-volume, multidisciplinary cancer centers, many patients undergo surgery in low-volume hospitals. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to examine considerations of former patients with rectal cancer when selecting their surgeon and to evaluate which considerations were associated with surgery at high-volume hospitals. DESIGN: In this retrospective cohort study, patients were surveyed about what they considered when selecting a cancer surgeon. SETTINGS: Study data were obtained via survey and the statewide Iowa Cancer Registry. PATIENTS: All eligible individuals diagnosed with invasive stages II/III rectal cancer from 2013 to 2017 identified through the registry were invited to participate. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcomes were the characteristics of the hospital where they received surgery (ie, National Cancer Institute designation, Commission on Cancer accreditation, and rectal cancer surgery volume). RESULTS: Among respondents, 318 of 417 (76%) completed surveys. Sixty-nine percent of patients selected their surgeon based on their physician's referral/recommendation, 20% based on surgeon/hospital reputation, and 11% based on personal connections to the surgeon. Participants who chose their surgeon based on reputation had significantly higher odds of surgery at National Cancer Institute-designated (OR 7.5; 95% CI, 3.8-15.0) or high-volume (OR 2.6; 95% CI, 1.2-5.7) hospitals than those who relied on referral. LIMITATIONS: This study took place in a Midwestern state with a predominantly white population, which limited our ability to evaluate racial/ethnic associations. CONCLUSION: Most patients with rectal cancer relied on referrals in selecting their surgeon, and those who did were less likely to receive surgery at a National Cancer Institute-designated or high-volume hospitals compared to those who considered reputation. Future research is needed to determine the impact of these decision factors on clinical outcomes, patient satisfaction, and quality of life. In addition, patients should be aware that relying on physician referral may not result in treatment from the most experienced or comprehensive care setting in their area. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B897.REMISIONES Y CONSIDERACIONES PARA LA TOMA DE DECISIONES RELACIONADAS CON LA SELECCIÓN DE UN CIRUJANO PARA EL TRATAMIENTO DEL CÁNCER DE RECTO EN EL MEDIO OESTE DE LOS ESTADOS UNIDOSANTECEDENTES:A pesar de la evidencia de resultados superiores para el tratamiento del cáncer de recto en centros oncológicos de gran volumen y multidisciplinarios, muchos pacientes se someten a cirugía en hospitales de bajo volumen.OBJETIVOS:Examinar las consideraciones de los antiguos pacientes con cáncer de recto al momento de seleccionar a su cirujano y evaluar qué consideraciones se asociaron con la cirugía en hospitales de gran volumen.DISEÑO:Encuestamos a los pacientes sobre qué aspectos consideraron al elegir un cirujano oncológico para completar este estudio de cohorte retrospectivo.AJUSTE:Los datos del estudio se obtuvieron mediante una encuesta y el Registro de Cáncer del estado de Iowa.PACIENTES:Se invitó a participar a todas las personas elegibles diagnosticadas con cáncer de recto invasivo en estadios II/III entre 2013 y 2017 identificadas a través del registro.PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE RESULTADO:Los resultados principales fueron las características del hospital donde fue realizada la cirugía (es decir, designación del Instituto Nacional del Cáncer, acreditación de la Comisión de Cáncer y volumen de cirugía del cáncer de recto).RESULTADOS:Hubo 318 de 417 (76%) encuestas completadas. El sesenta y nueve por ciento seleccionó a su cirujano en función de la referencia / recomendación de su médico, el 20% por la reputación del cirujano/hospital, y el 11% por sus conexiones personales con el cirujano. Los participantes que eligieron a su cirujano en función a la reputación tuvieron probabilidades significativamente más altas de cirugía en el Instituto Nacional del Cáncer designado (OR = 7,5, IC del 95%: 3,8-15,0) o en hospitales de alto volumen (OR = 2,6, IC del 95%: 1,2-5,7) que aquellos que dependían de la derivación.LIMITACIONES:Este estudio se llevó a cabo en un estado del medio oeste con una población predominantemente blanca, lo que limitó nuestra capacidad para evaluar las asociaciones raciales/étnicas.CONCLUSIONES:La mayoría de los pacientes con cáncer de recto dependían de las derivaciones para seleccionar a su cirujano, y los que lo hacían tenían menos probabilidades de recibir cirugía en un hospital designado por el Instituto Nacional del Cáncer o en hospitales de gran volumen en comparación con los que consideraban la reputación. Se necesitan investigaciones a futuro para determinar el impacto de estos factores de decisión en los resultados clínicos, la satisfacción del paciente y la calidad de vida. Además, los pacientes deben ser conscientes de que depender de la remisión de un médico puede no resultar en el tratamiento más experimentado o integral en su área. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B897. (Traducción-Dr Osvaldo Gauto).

Hospital Rurality and Gene Expression Profiling for Early-Stage Breast Cancer among Iowa Residents (2010-2018).

Objective: Given the challenges rural cancer patients face in accessing cancer care as well as the slower diffusion and adoption of new medical technologies among rural providers, the aim of our study was to examine trends in gene expression profiling (GEP) testing and evaluate the association between hospital rurality and receipt of GEP testing. Methods: Data from the Iowa Cancer Registry (ICR) were used to identify women with newly diagnosed, histologically confirmed breast cancer from 2010 through 2018 who met eligibility criteria for GEP testing. Patients were allocated to the hospitals where their most definitive surgical treatment was received, and Rural-Urban Commuting Area codes were used to categorize hospitals into urban (N = 43), large rural (N = 16), and small rural (N = 48). Adjusted odds ratios (aORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were estimated using multivariable logistic regression to evaluate the association between hospital rurality and GEP test use, adjusting for demographic and clinical characteristics. The association between test result and treatment received was assessed among patients who received Oncotype DX (ODX) testing. Results: Of 6,726 patients eligible for GEP test use, 46% (N = 3,069) underwent testing with 95% receiving ODX. While overall GEP testing rates increased over time from 42% between 2010 and 2012 to 51% between 2016 and 2018 (P trend < 0.0001), use continued to be the lowest among patients treated at hospitals in small rural areas. The odds of GEP testing remained significantly lower among patients treated at hospitals located in small rural areas (aOR 0.55; 95% CI 0.43-0.71), after adjusting for demographic and clinical characteristics. ODX recurrence scores were highly correlated with chemotherapy use across all strata of hospital rurality. Conclusions: GEP testing continues to be underutilized, especially among those treated at small rural hospitals. Targeted interventions aimed at increasing rates of GEP testing to ensure the appropriate use of adjuvant chemotherapy may improve health outcomes and lower treatment-related costs.

The Use of Medical Claims Data for Identifying Missed Opportunities for HPV Immunization Among Privately Insured Adolescents in the State of Iowa.

BACKGROUND: Rates of adolescent human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination remain low, despite decades of safety and effectiveness data. We sought to quantify the extent of missed opportunities (MOs) for HPV vaccination among adolescents ages 11 to 13 in Iowa and compare the number of these MOs by gender and rurality. METHODS: Medical claims data from a midwestern insurance provider were used to calculate total numbers of MOs for HPV vaccination for adolescents with continuous health insurance enrollment between ages 11 and 13 (n = 14,505). We divided MOs into several categories: total, among non-initiators, occurring before initiation, occurring after the first dose, and occurring between first and last dose. Finally, we used t-tests to perform subgroup comparisons (urban vs. rural; male vs. female). RESULTS: Over half of adolescents failed to initiate vaccination by age 13. The majority of MOs occurred prior to initiation. Urban adolescents had more MOs than rural counterparts and males tended to have more MOs than females. Females experienced significantly fewer overall MOs than males 5.98 (SD = 5.49) compared to 6.18 (SD = 6.04) for males. Additionally, among non-initiators, urban females had significantly more MOs overall (M = 7.13; SD = 6.41) compared to rural females (M = 6.58; SD = 5.51). CONCLUSIONS: Results highlight the extent of MOs that occur at the critical time period between ages 11 and 13. A lack of opportunity was not the barrier to HPV vaccination, particularly among both males and urban adolescents. It will be critical for providers to use known strategies to reduce MOs and utilize all adolescent visits to ensure vaccination is completed by age 13.

Challenges to Adolescent HPV Vaccination and Implementation of Evidence-Based Interventions to Promote Vaccine Uptake During the COVID-19 Pandemic: "HPV Is Probably Not at the Top of Our List".

INTRODUCTION: The COVID-19 pandemic has prevented many adolescents from receiving their vaccines, including the human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine, on time. However, little is known about the impact of the pandemic on implementation of clinic-level evidence-based interventions (EBIs) that help to improve HPV vaccine uptake. In this qualitative study, we explored the pandemic's impact on EBI implementation and HPV vaccine delivery. METHODS: During August-November 2020, we interviewed clinic managers in a rural, midwestern state about their experiences implementing EBIs for HPV vaccination during the COVID-19 pandemic. We used a multipronged sampling approach with both stratified and purposive sampling to recruit participants from Vaccines for Children clinics. We then conducted a thematic analysis of transcripts. RESULTS: In interviews (N = 18), 2 primary themes emerged: decreased opportunities for HPV vaccination and disruption to HPV-related implementation work. Most participants reported decreases in opportunities to vaccinate caused by structural changes in how they delivered care (eg, switched to telehealth visits) and patient fear of exposure to COVID-19. Disruptions to EBI implementation were primarily due to logistical challenges (eg, decreases in staffing) and shifting priorities. CONCLUSION: During the pandemic, clinics struggled to provide routine care, and as a result, many adolescents missed HPV vaccinations. To ensure these adolescents do not fall behind on this vaccine series, providers and researchers will need to recommit to EBI implementation and use existing strategies to promote vaccination. In the long term, improvements are needed to make EBI implementation more resilient to ensure that progress does not come to a halt in future pandemic events.

Hospital and Surgeon Selection for Medicare Beneficiaries With Stage II/III Rectal Cancer: The Role of Rurality, Distance to Care, and Colonoscopy Provider.

OBJECTIVE: To determine factors associated with rectal cancer surgery performed at high-volume hospitals (HVHs) and by high-volume surgeons (HVSs), including the roles of rurality and diagnostic colonoscopy provider characteristics. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Although higher-volume hospitals/surgeons often achieve superior surgical outcomes, many rectal cancer resections are performed by lower-volume hospitals/surgeons, especially among rural populations. METHODS: Patients age 66+ diagnosed from 2007 to 2011 with stage II/III primary rectal adenocarcinoma were selected from surveillance, epidemiology, and end results-medicare data. Patient ZIP codes were used to classify rural status. Hierarchical logistic regression was used to determine factors associated with surgery by HVH and HVS. RESULTS: Of 1601 patients, 22% were rural and 78% were urban. Fewer rural patients received surgery at a HVH compared to urban patients (44% vs 65%; P < 0.0001). Compared to urban patients, rural patients more often had colonoscopies performed by general surgeons (and less often from gastroenterologists or colorectal surgeons), and lived substantially further from HVHs; these factors were both associated with lower odds of surgery at a HVH or by a HVS. In addition, whereas over half of both rural and urban patients received their colonoscopy and surgery at the same hospital, rural patients who stayed at the same hospital were significantly less likely to receive surgery at a HVH or by a HVS compared to urban patients. CONCLUSIONS: Rural rectal cancer patients are less likely to receive surgery from a HVH/HVS. The role of the colonoscopy provider has important implications for referral patterns and initiatives seeking to increase centralization.

Impact of age, rurality and distance in predicting contralateral prophylactic mastectomy for breast cancer in a Midwestern state: a population-based study.

PURPOSE: Iowa is among several rural Midwestern states with the highest proportions of contralateral prophylactic mastectomy (CPM) in women < 45 years of age. We evaluated the role of rurality and travel distance in these surgical patterns. METHODS: Women with unilateral breast cancer (2007-2017) were identified using Iowa Cancer Registry records. Patients and treating hospitals were classified as metro, nonmetro, and rural based on Rural-Urban Continuum Codes. Differences in patient, tumor, and treatment characteristics and median travel distance (MTD) were compared. Characteristics associated with CPM were evaluated with multivariate logistic regression. RESULTS: 22,158 women were identified: 57% metro, 26% nonmetro and 18% rural. Young rural women had the highest proportion of CPM (52%, 39% and 40% for rural, metro, nonmetro women < 40 years). Half of all rural women had surgery at metro hospitals; these women had the longest MTD (62 miles). Among all women treated at metro hospitals, rural women had the highest proportion of CPM (17% rural vs 14% metro/nonmetro, p = 0.007). On multivariate analysis, traveling ≥ 50 miles (ORs 1.43-2.34) and rural residence (OR = 1.29) were independently predictive of CPM. Other risk factors were young age (< 40 years: OR = 7.28, 95% CI 5.97-8.88) and surgery at a metro hospital that offers reconstruction (OR = 2.30, 95% CI 1.65-3.21) and is not NCI-designated (OR = 2.34, 95% CI 1.92-2.86). CONCLUSION: There is an unexpectedly high proportion of CPM in young rural women in Iowa, and travel distance and availability of reconstructive services likely influence decision-making. Improving access to multidisciplinary care in rural states may help optimize decision-making.

Improving the Quality of Cancer Care in Community Hospitals.

BACKGROUND: Cancer patients treated in community hospitals receive less guideline-recommended care and experience poorer outcomes than those treated in academic medical centers or National Cancer Institute-Designated Cancer Centers. The Markey Cancer Center Affiliate Network (MCCAN) was designed to address this issue in Kentucky, the state with the highest cancer incidence and mortality rates in the U.S. METHODS: Using data obtained from the Kentucky Cancer Registry, the study evaluated the impact of patients treated in MCCAN hospitals on four evidence-based Commission on Cancer (CoC) quality measures using a before-and-after matched-cohort study design. Each group included 13 hospitals matched for bed size, cancer patient volume, community population, and region (Appalachian vs. non-Appalachian). Compliance with quality measures was assessed for the 3 years before the hospital joined MCCAN (T1) and the 3 years afterward (T2). RESULTS: In T1, the control hospitals demonstrated greater compliance with two quality measures than the MCCAN hospitals. In T2, the MCCAN hospitals achieved greater compliance in three measures than the control hospitals. From T1 to T2, the MCCAN hospitals significantly increased compliance on three measures (vs. 1 measure for the control hospitals). Although most of the hospitals were not accredited by the CoC in T1, 92% of the MCCAN hospitals had achieved accreditation by the end of T2 compared with 23% of the control hospitals. CONCLUSION: After the MCCAN hospitals joined the Network, their compliance with quality measures and achievement of CoC accreditation increased significantly compared with the control hospitals. The unique academic/community-collaboration model provided by MCCAN was able to make a significant impact on improvement of cancer care. Future research is needed to adapt and evaluate similar interventions in other states and regions.

Rural disparities in surgical care from gynecologic oncologists among Midwestern ovarian cancer patients.

OBJECTIVE: Up to one-third of women with ovarian cancer in the United States do not receive surgical care from a gynecologic oncologist specialist despite guideline recommendations. We aim to investigate the impact of rurality on receiving surgical care from a specialist, referral to a specialist, and specialist surgery after referral, and the consequences of specialist care. METHODS: We utilized a retrospective cohort created through an extension of standard cancer surveillance in three Midwestern states. Multivariable adjusted logistic regression was utilized to assess gynecologic oncologist treatment of women 18-89 years old, who were diagnosed with primary, histologically confirmed, malignant ovarian cancer in 2010-2012 in Kansas, Missouri and Iowa by rurality. RESULTS: Rural women were significantly less likely to receive surgical care from a gynecologic oncologist specialist (adjusted odds ratio (OR) 0.37, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.24-0.58) and referral to a specialist (OR 0.37, 95% CI 0.23-0.59) compared to urban women. There was no significant difference in specialist surgery after a referral (OR 0.56, 95% CI 0.26-1.20). Rural women treated surgically by a gynecologic oncologist versus non-specialist were more likely to receive cytoreduction and more complete tumor removal to ≤1 cm. CONCLUSION: There is a large rural-urban difference in receipt of ovarian cancer surgery from a gynecologic oncologist specialist (versus a non-specialist). Disparities in referral rates contribute to the rural-urban difference. Further research will help define the causes of referral disparities, as well as promising strategies to address them.

Rural residence is related to shorter survival in epithelial ovarian cancer patients.

OBJECTIVE: Rural residence has been related to health disparities and greater mortality risk in cancer patients, including gynecologic cancer patients. Lower survival rates for rural cancer survivors have been attributed to limited access to specialized healthcare, including surgery. Here, we examined whether a rural/urban survival gap existed in ovarian cancer patients receiving surgery at tertiary-care facilities, and potential causes for this gap, including educational attainment. METHODS: Rural and urban patients with high grade invasive ovarian cancer (n = 342) seeking treatment at two midwestern tertiary-care university hospitals were recruited pre-surgery and followed until death or censoring date. Rural/urban residence was categorized using the USDA Rural-Urban Continuum Codes. Stratified Cox proportional hazards regression analyses, with clinical site as strata, adjusting for clinical and demographic covariates, were used to examine the effect of rurality on survival. RESULTS: Despite specialized surgical care, rural cancer survivors showed a higher likelihood of death compared to their urban counterparts, HR = 1.39 (95% CI: 1.04, 1.85) p = 0.026, adjusted for covariates. A rurality by education interaction was observed (p = 0.027), indicating significantly poorer survival in rural vs. urban patients among those with trade school/some college education, adjusted HR = 2.49 (95% CI: 1.44, 4.30), p = 0.001; there was no rurality survival disparity for the other 2 levels of education. CONCLUSIONS: Differences in ovarian cancer survival are impacted by rurality, which is moderated by educational attainment even in patients receiving initial care in tertiary settings. Clinicians should be aware of rurality and education as potential risk factors for adverse outcomes and develop approaches to address these possible risks.

Comparison of Urban-Rural Readmission Rates After Colorectal Cancer Surgery: Findings From a Privately Insured Population.

OBJECTIVES: We assessed the 30-day readmission rate of a privately insured population diagnosed with colorectal cancer (CRC) who had primary tumor resection in rural and urban communities. METHODS: Claims data of people aged <65 with a diagnosis of CRC between 2012 and 2016 and enrolled in a private health plan administered by BlueCross BlueShield of Nebraska were analyzed. Readmission was defined as the number of discharged patients who were readmitted within 30 days, divided by all discharged patients. Multivariate logistic regression was used to estimate the factors associated with readmission. RESULTS: The urban population had a higher readmission rate (11%) than the rural population (8%). Although the adjusted odds ratio showed that there is no difference in readmission between rural and urban residents, patients with a Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) of >1 were more likely than those without CCI to be readmitted (OR 3.59, 1.41-9.11). Patients with open vs. laparoscopic surgery (OR 2.80, 1.39-5.63) and those with an obstructed or perforated colon vs. none (OR 7.17, 3.75-13.72) were more likely to be readmitted. CONCLUSIONS: Readmission after CRC surgery occurs frequently. Interventions that target the identified risk factors should reduce readmission rates in this privately insured population.