Population-based geographic access to parent and satellite National Cancer Institute Cancer Center Facilities

Travel burden and bypassing closest site for surgical cancer treatment for urban and rural oncology patients

PURPOSE

We examined the relationship between travel burden for surgical cancer care and rurality, geographic bypass of the nearest surgical facility, cancer type, and mortality outcomes.

METHODS

Using Medicare claims and enrollment data (2016-2018) from beneficiaries with cancer of the colon, rectum, lung, or pancreas, we measured travel times to: the nearest surgical facility and facility used. For those who bypassed the nearest, we examined travel time and rurality in relation to surgical rates. Using multivariable regression modeling, we estimated associations of bypass with 90-day postoperative- and one-year mortality; rurality was examined as an effect modifier.

FINDINGS

Among 211,025 beneficiaries with cancer, 25.5% resided in non-metropolitan areas. About 66% of metropolitan/micropolitan, and 78% of small town/rural patients bypassed their closest facility. Increasing rurality was significantly associated with increased likelihood of bypass (Referent = metropolitan, OR; 95%CI: micropolitan 1.10; 1.04-1.16, small town/rural 2.08; 1.96-2.20. Bypassing the nearest facility was associated with decreased likelihood of both 90-day postoperative mortality (OR = 0.79; 95%CI 0.74-0.85) and 1-year mortality (OR = 0.81; 95%CI 0.77-0.86). The greatest decrement in 1-year mortality was for pancreatic cancer across all rural-urban categories (OR; 95%CI: metropolitan 0.63; 0.53-0.76; micropolitan 0.53; 0.29-0.97); small town/rural 0.46; 0.25-0.86).

CONCLUSIONS

Most Medicare beneficiaries with lung, colon, rectal, or pancreatic cancer bypassed the closest facility providing surgical cancer care, especially rural patients. Bypassing was associated with a lower likelihood of 90-day postoperative, and 1-year mortality. Understanding determinants of bypassing, particularly among rural patients, may reveal potential mechanisms to improve cancer outcomes and reduce rural cancer disparities.

Colorectal Cancer Outcomes: A Comparative Review of Resource-Limited Settings in Low- and Middle-Income Countries and Rural America

Background/Objectives: Colorectal cancer remains a significant global health challenge, particularly in resource-limited settings where patient-centered outcomes following surgery are often suboptimal. Although more prevalent in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), segments of the United States have similarly limited healthcare resources, resulting in stark inequities even within close geographic proximity. Methods: This review compares and contrasts colorectal cancer outcomes in LMICs with those in resource-constrained communities in rural America, utilizing an established implementation science framework to identify key determinants of practice for delivering high-quality colorectal cancer care. Results: Barriers and innovative, community-based strategies aimed at improving patient-centered outcomes for colorectal cancer patients in low resource settings are identified. We explore innovative approaches and community-based strategies aimed at improving patient-centered outcomes, highlighting the newly developed colorectal surgery fellowship in Sub-Saharan Africa as a model of innovation in this field. Conclusions: By exploring these diverse contexts, this paper proposes actionable solutions and strategies to enhance surgical care of colorectal cancer and patient outcomes, ultimately aiming to inform global health practices, inspire collaboration between LMIC and rural communities, and improve care delivery across various resource settings.

Geographic Access to Fertility Counseling among Adolescent and Young Adult Women with Cancer in North Carolina

BACKGROUND

Fertility counseling is recommended for adolescent and young adult women facing gonadotoxic cancer therapy. However, fertility care is subspecialized medical care offered at a limited number of institutions, making geographic access a potential barrier to guideline-concordant care. We assessed the relationship between geographic access and receipt of fertility counseling among adolescent and young adult women with cancer.

METHODS

Using data from the North Carolina Central Cancer Registry, we identified women diagnosed with lymphoma, gynecologic cancer, or breast cancer at ages 15 to 39 years during 2004 to 2015. Eligible women were invited to complete an online survey on various topics, including fertility counseling. Geographic access was measured, using geocoded addresses, as vehicular travel time from residence to the nearest fertility clinic available at diagnosis. Multivariable regression models were used to examine the association between travel time and receipt of fertility counseling by provider type: health care provider versus fertility specialist.

RESULTS

Analyses included 380 women. The median travel time to a fertility clinic was 31 (IQR: 17-71) minutes. Overall, 75% received fertility counseling from a health care provider and 16% by a fertility specialist. Women who lived ≥30 minutes from a clinic were 13% less likely to receive fertility counseling by a health care provider (prevalence ratio: 0.87; 95% confidence interval, 0.75-1.00) and 49% less likely to receive counseling by a fertility specialist (prevalence ratio: 0.51; 95% confidence interval, 0.28-0.93).

CONCLUSIONS

Women who lived further away from fertility clinics were less likely to receive fertility counseling.

IMPACT

Interventions to improve access to fertility counseling should include strategies to alleviate the burden of geographic access.

Clinician-to-clinician connectedness and access to gastric cancer surgery at National Cancer Institute-designated cancer centers

BACKGROUND

For patients with gastric cancer, the pathway from primary care (PC) clinician to gastroenterologist to cancer specialist (medical oncologist or surgeons) is referral dependent. The impact of clinician connectedness on disparities in quality gastric cancer care, such as at National Cancer Institute-designated cancer centers (NCI-CC), remains underexplored. This study evaluated how clinician connectedness influences access to gastrectomy at NCI-CC.

METHODS

Maryland's All-Payer Claims Database was used to evaluate 667 patients who underwent gastrectomy for cancer from 2013 to 2018. Two separate referral linkages, defined as ≥9 shared patients, were examined: (1) PC clinicians to gastroenterologists at NCI-CC and (2) gastroenterologists to cancer specialists at NCI-CC. Multiple logistic regression models determined associations between referral linkages and odds of undergoing gastrectomy at NCI-CC.

RESULTS

Only 15% of gastrectomies were performed at NCI-CC. Patients of gastroenterologists with referral links to cancer specialists at NCI-CC were more likely to be <65 years, male, White, and privately insured. Every additional referral link between PC clinician and gastroenterologist at NCI-CC and between gastroenterologist and cancer specialist at NCI-CC increased the odds of gastrectomy at NCI-CC by 71% and 26%, respectively. Black patients had half the odds as White patients in receiving gastrectomy at NCI-CC; however, adjusting for covariates including clinician-to-clinician connectedness attenuated this observation.

CONCLUSION

Patients of clinicians with low connectedness and Black patients are less likely to receive gastrectomy at NCI-CC. Enhancing clinician connectedness is necessary to address disparities in cancer care. These results are relevant to policy makers, clinicians, and patient advocates striving for health equity.

Patient reports of cancer care coordination in rural Hawaii

PURPOSE

Rural residents experience disproportionate burdens of cancer, and poorer cancer health outcomes in rural populations are partly attributed to care delivery challenges. Cancer patients in rural areas often experience unique challenges with care coordination. In this study, we explored patient reports of care coordination among rural Hawaii patients with cancer and compared rural and urban patients' perceptions of cancer care coordination.

METHODS

80 patients receiving active treatment for cancer from rural Hawaii participated in a care coordination study in 2020-2021. Participants completed the Care Coordination Instrument, a validated oncology patient questionnaire.

FINDINGS

Mean age of rural cancer patients was 63.0 (SD = 12.1), and 57.7% were female. The most common cancer types were breast and GI. Overall, rural and urban patients' perceptions of care coordination were comparable (p > 0.05). There were statistically significant differences between rural and urban patients' perceptions in communication and navigation aspects of care coordination (p = 0.02 and 0.04, respectively). Specific differences included a second opinion consultation, clinical trial considerations, and after-hours care. 43% of rural patients reported traveling by air for part or all of their cancer treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

Findings suggest that while overall perceptions of care coordination were similar between rural and urban patients, differential perceptions of specific care coordination areas between rural and urban patients may reflect limited access to care for rural patients. Improving access to cancer care may be a potential strategy to enhance care coordination for rural patients and ultimately address rural-urban cancer health disparities.

Rural-Urban Cancer Incidence and Trends in the United States, 2000 to 2019

BACKGROUND

Despite consistent improvements in cancer prevention and care, rural and urban disparities in cancer incidence persist in the United States. Our objective was to further examine rural-urban differences in cancer incidence and trends.

METHODS

We used the North American Association of Central Cancer Registries dataset to investigate rural-urban differences in 5-year age-adjusted cancer incidence (2015-2019) and trends (2000-2019), also examining differences by region, sex, race/ethnicity, and tumor site. Age-adjusted rates were calculated using SEER∗Stat 8.4.1, and trend analysis was done using Joinpoint, reporting annual percent changes (APC).

RESULTS

We observed higher all cancer combined 5-year incidence rates in rural areas (457.6 per 100,000) compared with urban areas (447.9), with the largest rural-urban difference in the South (464.4 vs. 449.3). Rural populations also exhibited higher rates of tobacco-associated, human papillomavirus-associated, and colorectal cancers, including early-onset cancers. Tobacco-associated cancer incidence trends widened between rural and urban from 2000 to 2019, with significant, but varying, decreases in urban areas throughout the study period, whereas significant rural decreases only occurred between 2016 and 2019 (APC = -0.96). Human papillomavirus-associated cancer rates increased in both populations until recently with urban rates plateauing whereas rural rates continued to increase (e.g., APC = 1.56, 2002-2019).

CONCLUSIONS

Rural populations had higher overall cancer incidence rates and higher rates of cancers with preventive opportunities compared with urban populations. Improvements in these rates were typically slower in rural populations.

IMPACT

Our findings underscore the complex nature of rural-urban disparities, emphasizing the need for targeted interventions and policies to reduce disparities and achieve equitable health outcomes.

Geographic distance to Commission on Cancer-accredited and nonaccredited hospitals in the United States

PURPOSE

The Commission on Cancer (CoC) establishes standards to support multidisciplinary, comprehensive cancer care. CoC-accredited cancer programs diagnose and/or treat 73% of patients in the United States. However, rural patients may experience diminished access to CoC-accredited cancer programs. Our study evaluated distance to hospitals by CoC accreditation status, rurality, and Census Division.

METHODS

All US hospitals were identified from public-use Homeland Infrastructure Foundation-Level Data, then merged with CoC-accreditation data. Rural-Urban Continuum Codes (RUCC) were used to categorize counties as metro (RUCC 1-3), large rural (RUCC 4-6), or small rural (RUCC 7-9). Distance from each county centroid to the nearest CoC and non-CoC hospital was calculated using the Great Circle Distance method in ArcGIS.

FINDINGS

Of 1,382 CoC-accredited hospitals, 89% were in metro counties. Small rural counties contained a total of 30 CoC and 794 non-CoC hospitals. CoC hospitals were located 4.0, 10.1, and 11.5 times farther away than non-CoC hospitals for residents of metro, large rural, and small rural counties, respectively, while the average distance to non-CoC hospitals was similar across groups (9.4-13.6 miles). Distance to CoC-accredited facilities was greatest west of the Mississippi River, in particular the Mountain Division (99.2 miles).

CONCLUSIONS

Despite similar proximity to non-CoC hospitals across groups, CoC hospitals are located farther from large and small rural counties than metro counties, suggesting rural patients have diminished access to multidisciplinary, comprehensive cancer care afforded by CoC-accredited hospitals. Addressing distance-based access barriers to high-quality, comprehensive cancer treatment in rural US communities will require a multisectoral approach.

The Association Between Oncology Outreach and Timely Treatment for Rural Patients with Breast Cancer: A Claims-Based Approach

BACKGROUND

Oncology outreach is a common strategy for increasing rural access to cancer care, where traveling oncologists commute across healthcare settings to extend specialized care. Examining the extent to which physician outreach is associated with timely treatment for rural patients is critical for informing outreach strategies.

METHODS

We identified a 100% fee-for-service sample of incident breast cancer patients from 2015 to 2020 Medicare claims and apportioned them into surgery and adjuvant therapy cohorts based on treatment history. We defined an outreach visit as the provision of care by a traveling oncologist at a clinic outside of their primary hospital service area. We used hierarchical logistic regression to examine the associations between patient receipt of preoperative care at an outreach visit (preoperative outreach) and > 60-day surgical delay, and patient receipt of postoperative care at an outreach visit (postoperative outreach) and > 60-day adjuvant delay.

RESULTS

We identified 30,337 rural-residing patients who received breast cancer surgery, of whom 4071 (13.4%) experienced surgical delay. Among surgical patients, 14,501 received adjuvant therapy, of whom 2943 (20.3%) experienced adjuvant delay. In adjusted analysis, we found that patient receipt of preoperative outreach was associated with reduced odds of surgical delay (odds ratio [OR] 0.75, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.61-0.91); however, we found no association between patient receipt of postoperative outreach and adjuvant delay (OR 1.04, 95% CI 0.85-1.25).

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings indicate that preoperative outreach is protective against surgical delay. The traveling oncologists who enable such outreach may play an integral role in catalyzing the coordination and timeliness of patient-centered care.

Characterizing the Traveling Oncology Workforce and Its Influence on Patient Travel Burden: A Claims-Based Approach

PURPOSE

Oncology outreach is a common strategy for extending cancer care to rural patients. However, a nationwide characterization of the traveling workforce that enables this outreach is lacking, and the extent to which outreach reduces travel burden for rural patients is unknown.

METHODS

This cross-sectional study analyzed a rural (nonurban) subset of a 100% fee-for-service sample of 355,139 Medicare beneficiaries with incident breast, colorectal, and lung cancers. Surgical, medical, and radiation oncologists were linked to patients using Part B claims, and traveling oncologists were identified by observing hospital service area (HSA) transition patterns. We defined oncology outreach as the provision of cancer care by a traveling oncologist outside of their primary HSA. We used hierarchical gamma regression models to examine the separate associations between patient receipt of oncology outreach and one-way patient travel times to chemotherapy, radiotherapy, and surgery.

RESULTS

On average, 9,935 of 39,960 oncologists conducted annual outreach, where 57.8% traveled with low frequency (0-1 outreach visits/mo), 21.1% with medium frequency (1-3 outreach visits/mo), and 21.1% with high frequency (>3 outreach visits/mo). Oncologists provided surgery, radiotherapy, and chemotherapy to 51,715, 27,120, and 5,874 rural beneficiaries, respectively, of whom 2.5%, 6.9%, and 3.6% received oncology outreach. Rural patients who received oncology outreach traveled 16% (95% CI, 11 to 21) and 11% (95% CI, 9 to 13) less minutes to chemotherapy and radiotherapy than those who did not receive oncology outreach, corresponding to expected one-way savings of 15.9 (95% CI, 15.5 to 16.4) and 11.9 (95% CI, 11.7 to 12.2) minutes, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Our study introduces a novel claims-based approach for tracking the nationwide traveling oncology workforce and supports oncology outreach as an effective means for improving rural access to cancer care.

American Cancer Society's report on the status of cancer disparities in the United States, 2023

In 2021, the American Cancer Society published its first biennial report on the status of cancer disparities in the United States. In this second report, the authors provide updated data on racial, ethnic, socioeconomic (educational attainment as a marker), and geographic (metropolitan status) disparities in cancer occurrence and outcomes and contributing factors to these disparities in the country. The authors also review programs that have reduced cancer disparities and provide policy recommendations to further mitigate these inequalities. There are substantial variations in risk factors, stage at diagnosis, receipt of care, survival, and mortality for many cancers by race/ethnicity, educational attainment, and metropolitan status. During 2016 through 2020, Black and American Indian/Alaska Native people continued to bear a disproportionately higher burden of cancer deaths, both overall and from major cancers. By educational attainment, overall cancer mortality rates were about 1.6-2.8 times higher in individuals with ≤12 years of education than in those with ≥16 years of education among Black and White men and women. These disparities by educational attainment within each race were considerably larger than the Black-White disparities in overall cancer mortality within each educational attainment, ranging from 1.03 to 1.5 times higher among Black people, suggesting a major role for socioeconomic status disparities in racial disparities in cancer mortality given the disproportionally larger representation of Black people in lower socioeconomic status groups. Of note, the largest Black-White disparities in overall cancer mortality were among those who had ≥16 years of education. By area of residence, mortality from all cancer and from leading causes of cancer death were substantially higher in nonmetropolitan areas than in large metropolitan areas. For colorectal cancer, for example, mortality rates in nonmetropolitan areas versus large metropolitan areas were 23% higher among males and 21% higher among females. By age group, the racial and geographic disparities in cancer mortality were greater among individuals younger than 65 years than among those aged 65 years and older. Many of the observed racial, socioeconomic, and geographic disparities in cancer mortality align with disparities in exposure to risk factors and access to cancer prevention, early detection, and treatment, which are largely rooted in fundamental inequities in social determinants of health. Equitable policies at all levels of government, broad interdisciplinary engagement to address these inequities, and equitable implementation of evidence-based interventions, such as increasing health insurance coverage, are needed to reduce cancer disparities.

The interplay of financial toxicity, health care team communication, and psychosocial well-being among rural cancer patients and survivors

BACKGROUND

Financial toxicity contributes to psychosocial distress among cancer patients and survivors. Yet, contextual factors unique to rural settings affect patient experiences, and a deeper understanding is needed of the interplay between financial toxicity and health care team communication and its association with psychosocial well-being among rural oncology patients.

PURPOSE

We examined associations between financial toxicity and psychosocial well-being among rural cancer patients, exploring variability in these linkages by health care team communication.

METHODS

Using data from 273 rural cancer patients who participated in Cancer Support Community's Cancer Experience Registry, we estimated multivariable regression models predicting depression, anxiety, and social function by financial toxicity, health care team communication, and the interplay between them.

RESULTS

We demonstrate robust associations between financial toxicity and psychosocial outcomes among our sample of rural cancer patients and survivors. As financial toxicity increased, symptoms of depression and anxiety increased. Further, financial toxicity was linked with decreasing social function. Having health care team conversations about treatment costs and distress-related care reduced the negative impact of financial toxicity on depressive symptoms and social function, respectively, in rural cancer patients at greatest risk for financial burden.

CONCLUSIONS

Financial toxicity and psychosocial well-being are strongly linked, and these associations were confirmed in a rural sample. A theorized buffer to the detrimental impacts of financial toxicity-health care team communication-played a role in moderating these associations. Our findings suggest that health care providers in rural oncology settings may benefit from tools and resources to bolster communication with patients about costs, financial distress, and coordination of care.

Quality of breast surgery care at a comprehensive cancer center and its rural affiliate hospital

BACKGROUND

Cancer centers are increasingly affiliating with rural hospitals to perform surgery. Perioperative and oncologic outcomes for cancer center surgeons operating at rural hospitals are understudied.

METHODS

For patients with non-metastatic breast cancer from a rural catchment area who had oncologic surgery at an NCI-designated comprehensive cancer center (CC) or its rural affiliate (RA) from 2017 to 2022, we compared perioperative outcomes (composite of surgical site infection, seroma requiring drainage, and reoperation for margins) and receipt of guideline-concordant care (if patient received all applicable treatments) using descriptive statistics and chi-squared tests.

RESULTS

Among 168 patients, 99 had surgery at RA, 60 CC. RA patients were older, higher stage, and more often had lumpectomy. There were no differences in perioperative outcomes (CC 10%, RA 14%, p ​= ​0.445) or guideline concordant care (RA 76%, CC 78%, p ​= ​0.846).

CONCLUSIONS

Cancer center surgeons operating at a rural affiliate had comparable perioperative outcomes and guideline-concordant care.

Demographic disparities in receipt of care at a comprehensive cancer center

BACKGROUND

National Cancer Institute cancer centers (NCICCs) provide specialized cancer care including precision oncology and clinical treatment trials. While these centers can offer novel therapeutic options, less is known about when patients access these centers or at what timepoint in their disease course they receive specialized care. This is especially important since precision diagnostics and receipt of the optimal therapy upfront can impact patient outcomes and previous research suggests that access to these centers may vary by demographic characteristics. Here, we examine the timing of patients' presentation at Moffitt Cancer Center (MCC) relative to their initial diagnosis across several demographic characteristics.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study was conducted among patients who presented to MCC with breast, colon, lung, melanoma, and prostate cancers between December 2008 and April 2020. Patient demographic and clinical characteristics were obtained from the Moffitt Cancer Registry. The association between patient characteristics and the timing of patient presentation to MCC relative to the patient's cancer diagnosis was examined using logistic regression.

RESULTS

Black patients (median days = 510) had a longer time between diagnosis and presentation to MCC compared to Whites (median days = 368). Black patients were also more likely to have received their initial cancer care outside of MCC compared to White patients (odds ratio [OR] and 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.45 [1.32-1.60]). Furthermore, Hispanics were more likely to present to MCC at an advanced stage compared to non-Hispanic patients (OR [95% CI] = 1.28 [1.05-1.55]).

CONCLUSIONS

We observed racial and ethnic differences in timing of receipt of care at MCC. Future studies should aim to identify contributing factors for the development of novel mitigation strategies and assess whether timing differences in referral to an NCICC correlate with long-term patient outcomes.

Impact of Cancer Care Regionalization on Patient Volume

BACKGROUND

Cancer centers are regionalizing care to expand patient access, but the effects on patient volume are unknown. This study aimed to compare patient volumes before and after the establishment of head and neck regional care centers (HNRCCs).

METHODS

This study analyzed 35,394 unique new patient visits at MD Anderson Cancer Center (MDACC) before and after the creation of HNRCCs. Univariate regression estimated the rate of increase in new patient appointments. Geospatial analysis evaluated patient origin and distribution.

RESULTS

The mean new patients per year in 2006-2011 versus 2012-2017 was 2735 ± 156 patients versus 3155 ± 207 patients, including 464 ± 78 patients at HNRCCs, reflecting a 38.4 % increase in overall patient volumes. The rate of increase in new patient appointments did not differ significantly before and after HNRCCs (121.9 vs 95.8 patients/year; P = 0.519). The patients from counties near HNRCCs, showed a 210.8 % increase in appointments overall, 33.8 % of which were at an HNRCC. At the main campus exclusively, the shift in regional patients to HNRCCs coincided with a lower rate of increase in patients from the MDACC service area (33.7 vs. 11.0 patients/year; P = 0.035), but the trend was toward a greater increase in out-of-state patients (25.7 vs. 40.3 patients/year; P = 0.299).

CONCLUSIONS

The creation of HNRCCs coincided with stable increases in new patient volume, and a sizeable minority of patients sought care at regional centers. Regional patients shifted to the HNRCCs, and out-of-state patient volume increased at the main campus, optimizing access for both local and out-of-state patients.

The interaction of rurality and rare cancers for travel time to cancer care

PURPOSE

Geographic access to cancer care is known to significantly impact utilization and outcomes. Longer travel times have negative impacts for patients requiring highly specialized care, such as for rare cancers, and for those in rural areas. Scant population-based research informs geographic access to care for rare cancers and whether rurality impacts that access.

METHODS

Using Medicare data (2014-2015), we identified prevalent cancers and cancer-directed surgeries, chemotherapy, and radiation. We classified cancers as rare (incidence <6/100,000/year) or common (incidence ≥6/100,000/year) using previously published thresholds and categorized rurality from ZIP code of beneficiary residence. We estimated travel time between beneficiaries and providers for each service based on ZIP code. Descriptive statistics summarized travel time by rare versus common cancers, service type, and rurality.

FINDINGS

We included 1,169,761 Medicare beneficiaries (21.9% in nonmetropolitan areas), 87,399; 7.5% had rare cancers, with 9,133,003 cancer-directed services. Travel times for cancer services ranged from approximately 29 minutes (25th percentile) to 68 minutes (75th percentile). Travel times were similar for rare and common cancers overall (median: 45 vs 43 minutes) but differed by service type; 13.4% of surgeries were >2 hours away for rare cancers, compared to 8.3% for common cancers. Increasing rurality disproportionately increased travel time to surgical care for rare compared to common cancers.

CONCLUSIONS

Travel times to cancer services are longest for surgery, especially among rural residents, yet not markedly longer overall between rare versus common cancers. Understanding geographic access to cancer care for patients with rare cancers is important to delivering specialized care.

Availability of hospital-based cancer services before and after rural hospital closure, 2008-2017

INTRODUCTION

Rural populations have less access to cancer care services and experience higher cancer mortality rates than their urban counterparts, which may be exacerbated by hospital closures. Our objective was to examine the impact of hospital closures on access to cancer-relevant hospital services across hospital service areas (HSAs).

METHODS

We used American Hospital Association survey data from 2008 to 2017 to examine the change in access to cancer-related screening and treatment services across rural HSAs that sustained hospitals over time, experienced any closures, or had all hospitals close. We performed a longitudinal analysis to assess the association between hospital closure occurrence and maintenance or loss of cancer-related service lines accounting for hospital and HSA-level characteristics. Maps were also developed to display changes in the availability of services across HSAs.

RESULTS

Of the 2,014 rural HSAs, 3.8% experienced at least 1 hospital closure during the study period, most occurring in the South. Among HSAs that experienced hospital closure, the loss of surgery services lines was most common, while hospital closures did not affect the availability of overall oncology and radiation services. Screening services either were stable (mammography) or increased (endoscopy) in areas with no closures.

DISCUSSION

Rural areas persistently experience less access to cancer treatment services, which has been exacerbated by hospital closures. Lack of Medicaid expansion in many Southern states and other policy impacts on hospital financial viability may play a role in this. Future research should explore the impact of closures on cancer treatment receipt and outcomes.

Racial disparities in inpatient clinical presentation, treatment, and outcomes in brain metastasis

Background

Few studies have assessed the impact of race on short-term patient outcomes in the brain metastasis population. The goal of this study is to evaluate the association of race with inpatient clinical presentation, treatment, in-hospital complications, and in-hospital mortality rates for patients with brain metastases (BM).

Method

Using data collected from the National Inpatient Sample between 2004 and 2014, we retrospectively identified adult patients with a primary diagnosis of BM. Outcomes included nonroutine discharge, prolonged length of stay (pLOS), in-hospital complications, and mortality.

Results

Minority (Black, Hispanic/other) patients were less likely to receive surgical intervention compared to White patients (odds ratio [OR] 0.70; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.66-0.74, p < 0.001; OR 0.88; 95% CI 0.84-0.93, p < 0.001). Black patients were more likely to develop an in-hospital complication than White patients (OR 1.35, 95% CI 1.28-1.41, p < 0.001). Additionally, minority patients were more likely to experience pLOS than White patients (OR 1.48; 95% CI 1.41-1.57, p < 0.001; OR 1.34; 95% CI 1.27-1.42, p < 0.001). Black patients were more likely to experience a nonroutine discharge (OR 1.25; 95% CI 1.19-1.31, p < 0.001) and higher in-hospital mortality than White (OR 1.13; 95% CI 1.03-1.23, p = 0.008).

Conclusion

Our analysis demonstrated that race is associated with disparate short-term outcomes in patients with BM. More efforts are needed to address these disparities, provide equitable care, and allow for similar outcomes regardless of care.

Pre-pandemic geographic access to hospital-based telehealth for cancer care in the United States

IMPORTANCE

Little is known about US hospitals' capacity to ensure equitable provision of cancer care through telehealth.

OBJECTIVE

To conduct a national analysis of hospitals' provision of telehealth and oncologic services prior to the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, along with geographic and sociodemographic correlates of access.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

Retrospective cross-sectional analysis with Geographic Information Systems mapping of 1) 2019 American Hospital Association (AHA) Annual Hospital Survey and IT Supplement, 2) 2013 Urban Influence Codes (UIC) from the United States Department of Agriculture, 3) 2018 Area Health Resources Files from the Health Services and Resources Administration (HRSA).

INTERVENTIONS

Hospitals were categorized by telehealth and oncology services availability. Counties were classified as low-, moderate-, or high-access based on availability of hospital-based oncology and telehealth within their boundaries.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Geospatial mapping of access to hospital-based telehealth for cancer care. Generalized logistic mixed effects models identified associations between sociodemographic factors and county- and hospital-level access to telehealth and oncology care.

RESULTS

2,054 out of 4,540 hospitals (45.2%) reported both telehealth and oncology services. 272 hospitals (6.0%) offered oncology without telehealth, 1,369 (30.2%) offered telehealth without oncology, and 845 (18.6%) hospitals offered neither. 1,288 out of 3,152 counties with 26.6 million residents across 41 states had no hospital-based access to either oncology or telehealth. After adjustment, rural hospitals were less likely than urban hospitals to offer telehealth alongside existing oncology care (OR 0.27; 95% CI 0.14-0.55; p < .001). No county-level factors were significantly associated with telehealth availability among hospitals with oncology.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Hospital-based cancer care and telehealth are widely available across the US; however, 8.4% of patients are at risk for geographic barriers to cancer care. Advocacy for adoption of telehealth is critical to ensuring equitable access to high-quality cancer care, ultimately reducing place-based outcomes disparities. Detailed, prospective, data collection on telehealth utilization for cancer care is also needed to ensure improvement in geographic access inequities.

Developing a Preclinical Nurse-Nurse Communication Framework for Clinical Trial Patient-Related Safety Information

Clinical trial trials have become increasingly complex in their design and implementation. Investigational safety profiles are not easily accessed by clinical nurses and providers when trial participants present for clinical care, such as in emergency or urgent care. Wearable devices are now commonly used as bridging technologies to obtain participant data and house investigational product safety information. Clinical nurse identification and communication of safety information are critical to dissuade adverse events, patient injury, and trial withdrawal, which may occur when clinical care is misaligned to a research protocol. Based on a feasibility study and follow-up wearable device prototype study, this preclinical nurse-nurse communication framework guides clinical nurse verbal and nonverbal communication of safety-related trial information to direct patient care activities in the clinical setting. Communication and information theories are incorporated with Carrington's Nurse-to-Nurse Communication Framework to encompass key components of a clinical nurse's management of a trial participant safety event when a clinical trial wearable device is encountered during initial assessment. Use of the preclinical nurse-nurse communication framework may support clinical nurse awareness of trial-related wearable devices. The framework may further emphasize the importance of engaging with research nurses, patients, and caregivers to acquire trial safety details impacting clinical care decision-making.

Multiscale analysis of cancer service areas in the United States

The purpose of delineating Cancer Service Areas (CSAs) is to define a reliable unit of analysis, more meaningful than geopolitical units such as states and counties, for examining geographic variations of the cancer care markets using geographic information systems (GIS). This study aims to provide a multiscale analysis of the U.S. cancer care markets based on the 2014-2015 Medicare claims of cancer-directed surgery, chemotherapy, and radiation. The CSAs are delineated by a scale-flexible network community detection algorithm automated in GIS so that the patient flows are maximized within CSAs and minimized between them. The multiscale CSAs include those comparable in size to those 4 census regions, 9 divisions, 50 states, and also 39 global optimal CSAs that generates the highest modularity value. The CSAs are more effective in capturing the U.S. cancer care markets because of its higher localization index, lower cross-border utilizations, and shorter travel time. The first two comparisons reveal that only a few regions or divisions are representative of the underlying cancer care markets. The last two comparisons find that among the 39 CSAs, 54% CSAs comprise multiple states anchored by cities near inner state borders, 28% are single-state CSAs, and 18% are sub-state CSAs. Their (in)consistencies across state borders or within each state shed new light on where the intervention of cancer care delivery or the adjustment of cancer care costs are needed to meet the challenges in the U.S. cancer care system. The findings could guide stakeholders to target public health policies for more effective coordination of cancer care in improving outcomes and reducing unnecessary costs.

Utilization of National Cancer Institute-Designated Cancer Centers by Medicare Beneficiaries with Cancer

BACKGROUND

Little is known about which patients use National Cancer Institute-designated cancer centers (NCICCs) nationally. This study aimed to identify sociodemographic characteristics associated with decreased NCICC use among Medicare beneficiaries.

METHODS

This study examined a national cohort of 534,008 Medicare beneficiaries with cancer in 2017 using multivariable logistic regressions for NCICC use. The covariates in the study were sex, age, cancer type, race/ethnicity, dual-eligibility status for Medicaid and Medicare, and NCICC presence in the home state.

RESULTS

In 2017, 19.5 % of Medicare beneficiaries with cancer used an NCICC at least once. Dual-eligible beneficiaries had 29 % lower adjusted odds of NCICC use than non-dual-eligible beneficiaries (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 0.71; 95 % confidence interval [CI], 0.70-0.73; p < 0.001). American Indian/Alaska Native beneficiaries had 40 % lower odds of NCICC use than non-Hispanic white (NHW) beneficiaries (aOR, 0.60; 95 % CI, 0.53-0.68; p < 0.001). Compared with NHW beneficiaries, the odds of NCICC use were higher for black beneficiaries by 15 % (aOR, 1.15; 95 % CI, 1.12-1.18; p < 0.001), for Hispanic beneficiaries by 31 % (aOR, 1.31; 95 % CI, 1.26-1.35; p < 0.001), and for Asian/Pacific Islander beneficiaries by 126 % (aOR, 2.26; 95 % CI, 2.16-2.36; p < 0.001). Utilization declined steadily in older groups, with beneficiaries older than 95 years showing 73 % lower odds of NCICC use than beneficiaries younger than 65 years (aOR, 0.27; 95 % CI, 0.24-0.29; p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Medicaid-eligible, American Indian/Alaska Native, and older patients are substantially less likely to use NCICCs. Future research should focus on defining and addressing the barriers to NCICC access for these populations.

Social Determinants of Cancer Risk Among American Indian and Alaska Native Populations: An Evidence Review and Map

Objectives:

To explore current literature on social determinants of health (SDOH) and cancer among American Indian and Alaska Native (AI/AN) populations.

Methods:

We searched Ovid MEDLINE^®, CINAHL, and PsycINFO databases for articles published during 2000 to 2020, which included terms for SDOH and cancer occurrence in AI/AN populations. We derived the data extraction elements from the PROGRESS-Plus framework. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA)-Equity extension guided the evidence map.

Results:

From 2180 screened articles, 297 were included. Most were observational (93.9%), employed a cross-sectional design (83.2%), were categorized as cancer occurrence and surveillance research (62%), and included no cancer-related risk factors (70.7%). Race, gender, and place were the most frequently included PROGRESS-Plus categories. Religion, relationship features, and characteristics of discrimination were least common. Only 12% of articles mentioned historical/current trauma or historical context.

Conclusions:

Gaps exist in our understanding of SDOH as drivers of cancer disparities in AI/AN populations. Future studies in health equity science may incorporate historical and cultural factors into SDOH frameworks tailored for AI/AN populations.

The Road Less Traveled: Transportation Barriers to Cancer Care Delivery in the Rural Patient Population

Patients with cancer residing in geographically rural areas experience lower rates of preventative screening, more advanced disease at presentation, and higher mortality rates compared with urban populations. Although multiple factors contribute, access to transportation has been proposed as a critical barrier affecting timeliness and quality of health care delivery in rural populations. Patients from geographically rural regions may face a variety of transportation barriers, including lack of public transportation, limited access to private vehicles, and increased travel distance to specialized oncologic care. A search using PubMed was conducted to identify articles pertaining to transportation barriers to cancer care and tested interventions in rural patient populations. Studies demonstrate that transportation barriers are associated with delayed follow-up after abnormal screening test results, decreased access to specialized oncology care, and lower rates of receipt of guideline-concordant treatment. Low clinical trial enrollment and variability in survivorship care are also linked to transportation barriers in rural patient populations. Given the demonstrated impact of transportation access on equitable cancer care delivery, several interventions have been tested. Telehealth visits and outreach clinics appear to reduce patient travel burden and increase access to specialized care, and patient navigation programs are effective in connecting patients with local resources, such as free or subsidized nonemergency medical transportation. To ensure equal access to high-quality cancer care and reduce geographic disparities, the design and implementation of tailored, multilevel interventions to address transportation barriers affecting rural communities is critical.

Definition and categorization of rural and assessment of realized access to care

OBJECTIVE

To examine how three measures of realized access to care vary by definitions and categorizations of "rural".

DATA SOURCES

Health Information National Trends Survey (HINTS) data, a nationally representative survey assessing knowledge of health-related information, were used. Participants were categorized by county-based Urban Influence Codes (UICs), Rural-Urban Continuum Codes (RUCCs), and census tract-based Rural-Urban Commuting Area (RUCAs).

STUDY DESIGN

Three approaches were used across categories of UICs, RUCCs, and RUCAs: (1) non-metropolitan/metropolitan, (2) three-group categorization based upon population size, and (3) three-group categorization based on adjacency to metropolitan areas. Wald Chi-square tests evaluated differences in sociodemographic variables and three measures of realized access across three of Penchansky's "A's of access" and approaches. The three outcome measures included: having a regular provider (realized availability), self-reported "excellent" quality of care (realized acceptability), and self-report of the provider "always" spending enough time with you (provider attentiveness-realized accommodation). The average marginal effects corresponding to each outcome were calculated.

DATA COLLECTION/EXTRACTION METHODS

N/A PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: All approaches indicated comparable variation in sociodemographics. In all approaches, RUCA-based categorizations showed differences in having a regular provider (e.g., 68.9% of non-metropolitan and 64.4% of metropolitan participants had a regular provider). This association was attenuated in multivariable analyses. No rural-urban differences in quality of care were seen in unadjusted or adjusted analyses regardless of approach. After adjustment for covariates, rural respondents reported greater provider attentiveness in some categorizations of rural compared with urban (e.g., non-metropolitan respondents reported 6.03 percentage point increase in probability of having an attentive provider [CI = 0.76-11.31%] compared with metropolitan).

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings underscore the importance of considering multiple definitions of rural to understand access disparities and suggest that continued research is needed to examine the interplay between potential and realized access. These findings have implications for federal funding, resource allocation, and identifying health disparities.

No Geographical Inequalities in Survival for Sarcoma Patients in France: A Reference Networks' Outcome?

The national reference network NETSARC+ provides remote access to specialized diagnosis and the Multidisciplinary Tumour Board (MTB) to improve the management and survival of sarcoma patients in France. The IGéAS research program aims to assess the potential of this innovative organization to address geographical inequalities in cancer management. Using the IGéAS cohort built from the nationwide NETSARC+ database, the individual, clinical, and geographical determinants of the 3-year overall survival of sarcoma patients in France were analyzed. The survival analysis was focused on patients diagnosed in 2013 (n = 2281) to ensure sufficient hindsight to collect patient follow-up. Our study included patients with bone (16.8%), soft-tissue (69%), and visceral (14.2%) sarcomas, with a median age of 61.8 years. The overall survival was not associated with geographical variables after adjustment for individual and clinical factors. The lower survival in precarious population districts [HR 1.23, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.48] in comparison to wealthy metropolitan areas (HR = 1) found in univariable analysis was due to the worst clinical presentation at diagnosis of patients. The place of residence had no impact on sarcoma patients' survival, in the context of the national organization driven by the reference network. Following previous findings, this suggests the ability of this organization to go through geographical barriers usually impeding the optimal management of cancer patients.

Trends in Cancer Treatment Service Availability Across Critical Access Hospitals and Prospective Payment System Hospitals

BACKGROUND

Rural residents experience worse cancer prognosis and access to cancer care providers than their urban counterparts. Critical access hospitals (CAHs) represent over half of all rural community hospitals. However, research on cancer services provided within CAHs is limited.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to investigate trends in cancer services availability in urban and rural Prospective Payment System (PPS) hospitals and CAHs.

DESIGN

Retrospective, time-series analysis using data from 2008 to 2017 American Hospital Association Annual Surveys. Multivariable logistic regressions were used to examine differential trends in cancer services between urban PPS, rural PPS, and CAHs, overall and among small (<25 beds) hospitals.

SUBJECTS

All US acute care and cancer hospitals (4752 in 2008 to 4722 in 2017).

MEASURES

Primary outcomes include whether a hospital provided comprehensive oncology services, chemotherapy, and radiation therapy each year.

RESULTS

In 2008, CAHs were less likely to provide all cancer services, especially chemotherapy (30.4%) and radiation therapy (2.9%), compared with urban (64.4% and 43.8%, respectively) and rural PPS hospitals (42.0% and 23.3%, respectively). During 2008-2017, compared with similarly sized PPS hospitals, CAHs were more likely to provide oncology services and chemotherapy, but with decreasing trends. Radiation therapy availability between small PPS hospitals and CAHs did not differ.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with all PPS hospitals, CAHs offered fewer cancer treatment services and experienced a decline in service capability over time. These differences in chemotherapy services were mainly driven by hospital size, as small urban and rural PPS hospitals had lower rates of chemotherapy than CAHs. Still, the lower rates of radiotherapy in CAHs highlight disproportionate challenges facing CAHs for some specialty services.

Incorporating broadband durability in measuring geographic access to health care in the era of telehealth: A case example of the 2-step virtual catchment area (2SVCA) Method

The COVID-19 (coronavirus disease 2019) pandemic has expanded telehealth utilization in unprecedented ways and has important implications for measuring geographic access to healthcare services. Established measures of geographic access to care have focused on the spatial impedance of patients in seeking health care that pertains to specific transportation modes and do not account for the underlying broadband network that supports telemedicine and e-health. To be able to measure the impact of telehealth on healthcare access, we created a pilot augmentation of existing methods to incorporate measures of broadband accessibility to measure geographic access to telehealth. A reliable measure of telehealth accessibility is important to enable policy analysts to assess whether the increasing prevalence of telehealth may help alleviate the disparities in healthcare access in rural areas and for disadvantaged populations, or exacerbate the existing gaps as they experience "double burdens."

Access to Chimeric Antigen Receptor T Cell Therapy for Diffuse Large B Cell Lymphoma

INTRODUCTION

Geographic access to novel oncology therapies, and the extent to which it may vary by potential sites of care, regions, and population characteristics, is poorly understood. We examined how expanding access to chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T cell therapy administration sites impacts patient travel distances and time.

METHODS

We used geographic information system techniques to calculate shortest travel distance and time between patients with relapsed/refractory diffuse large B cell lymphoma (DLBCL) and the nearest CAR T cell therapy administration site in three scenarios: academic hospitals; academic and community multispecialty hospitals; and academic and community multispecialty hospitals plus nonacademic specialty oncology network centers. Main outcome measures were differences in travel distance and time among the scenarios and the relationship between travel time and socioeconomic status, race, rural-urban areas, and non-Hodgkin lymphoma clusters. Non-Hodgkin lymphoma incidence, socioeconomic status, and administration centers were derived from governmental/publicly available data sources.

RESULTS

Of 3922 patients eligible for CAR T cell therapy, more than 37% had to travel more than 1 h to the nearest academic hospital. Average travel time and distance were significantly reduced by 23% and 30% (P < 0.001), respectively, when access was expanded to include community hospitals plus a broader range of oncology specialty treatment centers. Compared to academic hospitals alone, increasing access to include community hospitals decreased time and distance by 7% and 8% (P < 0.01), respectively. In addition, there would be a lower proportion of sites operating as the only care provider within 25 miles if access was expanded outside of academic hospitals only. Longer travel time was associated with lower socioeconomic status.

CONCLUSION

Many patients with DLBCL have long travel times to an academic hospital that administers CAR T cell therapy. Expanding access to care through site-of-care planning will help address regional, rural-urban, and sociodemographic equity in the geographic allocation of CAR T cell therapy.

The Intersection of Rural Residence and Minority Race/Ethnicity in Cancer Disparities in the United States

One in every twenty-five persons in America is a racial/ethnic minority who lives in a rural area. Our objective was to summarize how racism and, subsequently, the social determinants of health disproportionately affect rural racial/ethnic minority populations, provide a review of the cancer disparities experienced by rural racial/ethnic minority groups, and recommend policy, research, and intervention approaches to reduce these disparities. We found that rural Black and American Indian/Alaska Native populations experience greater poverty and lack of access to care, which expose them to greater risk of developing cancer and experiencing poorer cancer outcomes in treatment and ultimately survival. There is a critical need for additional research to understand the disparities experienced by all rural racial/ethnic minority populations. We propose that policies aim to increase access to care and healthcare resources for these communities. Further, that observational and interventional research should more effectively address the intersections of rurality and race/ethnicity through reduced structural and interpersonal biases in cancer care, increased data access, more research on newer cancer screening and treatment modalities, and continued intervention and implementation research to understand how evidence-based practices can most effectively reduce disparities among these populations.

Trends in Radiation Therapy for Bone Metastases, 2015 to 2017: Choosing Wisely in the Era of Complex Radiation

PURPOSE

Guidelines recommend short-course (≤10 fractions) external-beam radiation therapy (EBRT) for bone metastases. Stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) may also improve outcomes; however, routine use is not recommended outside clinical trials. We assessed national radiation therapy trends in complex techniques for bone metastases and associated expenditures.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Using a claims-based Medicare data set covering 84% of beneficiaries, we assessed the relative proportion of all radiation episodes represented by bone metastases. We then evaluated use of short-course and long-course (>10 fractions) EBRT, intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT), and SBRT for bone metastases in hospital-affiliated outpatient (OPD) or freestanding (FREE) facilities. We assessed differences using χ²d or Wilcoxon rank sum tests for categorical and continuous variables, respectively. We identified associations with modality, fractionation, and expenditures using multivariable logistic/linear regression.

RESULTS

Among 467,781 radiation episodes for 17 cancer diagnoses, the overall proportion of episodes dedicated to bone metastases (9.4%) was stable from 2015 to 2017, although treatments were increasing in the hospital-affiliated outpatient setting (P < .005). We identified 40,993 episodes for bone metastases, of which 63% were short-course EBRT, 24% were long-course EBRT, 7% were SBRT, and 6% were IMRT. Techniques more common in the hospital-affiliated outpatient setting included short-course EBRT (OPD, 69%, vs FREE, 56%) and SBRT (OPD, 9%, vs FREE, 5%). Techniques more common among free-standing centers included long-course EBRT (OPD, 19%, vs FREE, 31%) and IMRT (OPD, 4%, vs FREE, 9%). From 2015 to 2017, long-course EBRT decreased by an absolute 8%; short-course EBRT, SBRT, and IMRT increased by 4%, 2.5%, and 1%, respectively. The SBRT/IMRT uptake did not differ by setting (P = .4). Differences in expenditures between SBRT and short-course EBRT decreased by a relative 8% in professional and 12% in technical fees.

CONCLUSIONS

Approximately 1 in 4 patients received long-course EBRT, with small reductions in use largely replaced by complex treatment modalities. However, expenditures for complex modalities also decreased over time. As alternative payment models take effect, quality metrics are needed to ensure appropriate, effective, and safe delivery of complex technologies.

Influence of Rurality, Race, and Ethnicity on Non-Hodgkin Lymphoma Incidence

INTRODUCTION

Exposure to lymphomagens vary by geography. The extent to which these contribute to racial and ethnic disparities in non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) incidence is not well understood. We sought to evaluate the association between urban-rural status and racial and ethnic disparities in the 3 major NHL subtypes: diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL), follicular lymphoma (FL), and chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We used data on NHL incidence from 21 Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) population-based registries for the period 2000 to 2016. Population characteristics were compared by NHL subtype and urban-rural status, using rural-urban continuum codes from the US Department of Agriculture. Incidence rate ratios were calculated, and Poisson regression was used to assess the association between incidence and rurality.

RESULTS

A total of 136,197 DLBCL, 70,882 FL, and 120,319 CLL incident cases aged ≥ 20 years were reported. The majority of DLBCL patients were non-Hispanic white (73.5%), with 11.9% Hispanic and 7.3% non-Hispanic black, with a similar distribution observed in FL and CLL. Adjusting for age, sex, and family poverty, we found increased DLBCL incidence among Hispanics in increasingly urban areas compared to rural areas (rural incidence rate ratio [IRR] = 1.00; nonmetropolitan urban IRR = 1.32, 95% CI 1.16, 1.51; metropolitan urban IRR = 1.55, 95% CI 1.36, 1.76). Among non-Hispanic blacks, urban areas, relative to rural areas, were associated with increased CLL incidence (IRR = 1.48; 95% CI 1.27, 1.72).

CONCLUSION

Urban-rural incidence patterns suggest that environmental exposures in urban areas associated with DLBCL and CLL pathogenesis may disproportionately affect Hispanics and non-Hispanic blacks.

Factors Associated With Use of High-Cost Agents for the Treatment of Metastatic Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer

BACKGROUND

Antineoplastic agents approved in recent decades are a marked advancement in cancer treatment, but they come at considerable cost. These drugs may widen survival disparities between patients who receive these agents and those who do not. We examine factors associated with the use of high-cost antineoplastic agents for the treatment of metastatic non-small cell lung cancer.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective observational study using 2007-2015 Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End-Results-Medicare data supplemented with the Area Health Resource File. Patients were aged 66 years and older, were enrolled in fee-for-service Medicare Part D, were diagnosed with a first primary diagnosis of metastatic non-small cell lung cancer, and had received an antineoplastic agent. "High-cost agents" were defined as agents costing $5000 or more per month. Independent variables include race/ethnicity, urban or rural residency, census tract poverty, and treatment facility type (eg, National Cancer Institute designation).

RESULTS

Patients who lived in areas of high poverty were 4 percentage points less likely to receive high-cost agents (two-sided P < .001). Patients who were not treated at a National Cancer Institute-designated center were 10 percentage points less likely to receive these agents (two-sided P < .001). A 27 percentage-point increase in the likelihood of receiving a high-cost agent was observed in 2015, as compared to 2007, highlighting the rapid change in practice patterns (two-sided P < .001).

CONCLUSION

Potential policy and care delivery solutions involve outreach and support to community physicians who treat patients in remote areas. We estimate that widespread use of these agents conservatively cost approximately $3 billion per year for the treatment of metastatic non-small cell lung cancer alone.

Closing the Rural Cancer Care Gap: Three Institutional Approaches

Patients in rural areas face limited access to medical and oncology providers, long travel times, and low recruitment to clinical trials, all of which affect quality of care and health outcomes. Rural counties also have high rates of cancer-related mortality and other negative treatment outcomes. On April 10, 2019, ASCO hosted Closing the Rural Cancer Care Gap, the second event in its State of Cancer Care in America series. The event focused on two aspects of rural cancer care: a review of the major issues and concerns in delivering rural cancer care and a discussion of creative solutions to address rural-nonrural disparities. This article draws from the event and supporting literature to summarize the challenges to delivering high-quality care in rural communities, update ASCO’s workforce data on the geographic distribution of oncologists, and highlight 3 institutional approaches to addressing these challenges in diverse rural settings. The experience of the 3 institutions featured in the article suggests that increasing rural patients’ access to care requires expanding services and decreasing travel distances, mitigating financial burdens when insurance coverage is limited, opening avenues to clinical trial participation, and creating partnerships between providers and community leaders to address local gaps in care. Because the characteristics of rural communities, health care resources, and patient populations are not homogeneous, rural health disparities require local solutions that are based on community needs, available resources, and trusting and collaborative partnerships.

Geographic Variation in Overscreening for Colorectal, Cervical, and Breast Cancer Among Older Adults

IMPORTANCE

National guidelines balance risks and benefits of population-level cancer screening among adults with average risk. Older adults are not recommended to receive routine screening, but many continue to be screened (ie, are overscreened).

OBJECTIVE

To assess the prevalence of overscreening for colorectal, cervical, and breast cancers among older adults as well as differences in overscreening by metropolitan status.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

The cross-sectional study examined responses to a telephone survey of 176 348 community-dwelling adults. Participants were included if they met age and sex criteria, and they were excluded from each cancer-specific subsample if they had a history of that cancer. Data came from the 2018 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System, administered by the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

EXPOSURES

Metropolitan status, according to whether participants lived in a metropolitan statistical area.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Overscreening was assessed using US Preventive Services Task Force definitions, ie, whether participants self-reported having a screening after the recommended upper age limit for colorectal (75 years), cervical (65 years), or breast (74 years) cancer.

RESULTS

Of 176 348 participants (155 411 [88.1%] women; mean [SE] age, 75.0 [0.04] years; 150 871 [85.6%] non-Hispanic white; 60 456 [34.3%] with nonmetropolitan residence) the cancer-specific subsamples contained 20 937 [11.9%] men and 34 244 [19.4%] women for colorectal cancer, 82 811 [47.0%] women for cervical cancer, and 38 356 [21.8%] women for breast cancer. Overall, 9461 men (59.3%; 95% CI, 57.6%-61.1%) were overscreened for colorectal cancer; 14 463 women (56.2%; 95% CI, 54.7%-57.6%), for colorectal cancer; 31 988 women (45.8%; 95% CI, 44.9%-46.7%), for cervical cancer; and 26 198 women (74.1%; 95% CI, 73.0%-75.3%), for breast cancer. Overscreening was more common in metropolitan than nonmetropolitan areas for colorectal cancer among women (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 1.23; 95% CI, 1.08-1.39), cervical cancer (aOR, 1.20; 95% CI, 1.11-1.29), and breast cancer (aOR, 1.36; 95% CI, 1.17-1.57). Overscreening for cervical and breast cancers was also associated with having a usual source of care compared with not (eg, cervical cancer: aOR, 1.87; 95% CI, 1.56-2.25; breast cancer: aOR, 2.08; 95% CI, 1.58-2.76), good, very good, or excellent self-reported health compared with fair or poor self-reported health (eg, cervical cancer: aOR, 1.21; 95% CI, 1.11-1.32; breast cancer: aOR, 1.47; 95% CI, 1.28-1.69), an educational attainment greater than a high school diploma compared with a high school diploma or less (eg, cervical cancer: aOR, 1.14; 95% CI, 1.06-1.23; breast cancer: aOR, 1.30; 95% CI, 1.16-1.46), and being married or living as married compared with other marital status (eg, cervical cancer: OR, 1.36; 95% CI, 1.26-1.46; breast cancer: OR, 1.54; 95% CI, 1.34-1.77).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

In this study, overscreening for cancer among older adults was high, particularly for women living in metropolitan areas. Overscreening could be associated with health care access and patient-clinician relationships. Additional research on why overscreening persists and how to reduce overscreening is needed to minimize risks associated with cancer screening among older adults.

Estimating a Large Travel Time Matrix Between Zip Codes in the United States: A Differential Sampling Approach

Estimating a massive drive time matrix between locations is a practical but challenging task. The challenges include availability of reliable road network (including traffic) data, programming expertise, and access to high-performance computing resources. This research proposes a method for estimating a nationwide drive time matrix between ZIP code areas in the U.S.-a geographic unit at which many national datasets such as health information are compiled and distributed. The method (1) does not rely on intensive efforts in data preparation or access to advanced computing resources, (2) uses algorithms of varying complexity and computational time to estimate drive times of different trip lengths, and (3) accounts for both interzonal and intrazonal drive times. The core design samples ZIP code pairs with various intensities according to trip lengths and derives the drive times via Google Maps API, and the Google times are then used to adjust and improve some primitive estimates of drive times with low computational costs. The result provides a valuable resource for researchers.

Patterns in Geographic Access to Health Care Facilities Across Neighborhoods in the United States Based on Data From the National Establishment Time-Series Between 2000 and 2014

IMPORTANCE

The association between proximity to health care facilities and improved disease management and population health has been documented, but little is known about small-area health care environments and how the presence of health care facilities has changed over time during recent health system and policy change.

OBJECTIVE

To examine geographic access to health care facilities across neighborhoods in the United States over a 15-year period.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

Using longitudinal business data from the National Establishment Time-Series, this cross-sectional study examined the presence of and change in ambulatory care facilities and pharmacies and drugstores in census tracts (CTs) throughout the continental United States between 2000 and 2014. Between January and April 2019, multinomial logistic regression was used to estimate associations between health care facility presence and neighborhood sociodemographic characteristics over time.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Change in health care facility presence was measured as never present, lost, gained, or always present between 2000 and 2014. Neighborhood sociodemographic characteristics (ie, CTs) and their change over time were measured from US Census reports (2000 and 2010) and the American Community Survey (2008-2012).

RESULTS

Among 72 246 included CTs, the percentage of non-US-born residents, residents 75 years or older, poverty status, and population density increased, and 8.1% of CTs showed a change in the racial/ethnic composition of an area from predominantly non-Hispanic (NH) white to other racial/ethnic composition categories between 2000 and 2010. The presence of ambulatory care facilities increased from a mean (SD) of 7.7 (15.9) per CT in 2000 to 13.0 (22.9) per CT in 2014, and the presence of pharmacies and drugstores increased from a mean (SD) of 0.6 (1.0) per CT in 2000 to 0.9 (1.4) per CT in 2014. Census tracts with predominantly NH black individuals (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 2.37; 95% CI, 2.03-2.77), Hispanic/Latino individuals (aOR 1.30; 95% CI, 1.00-1.69), and racially/ethnically mixed individuals (aOR, 1.53; 95% CI, 1.33-1.77) in 2000 had higher odds of losing health care facilities between 2000 and 2014 compared with CTs with predominantly NH white individuals, after controlling for other neighborhood characteristics. Census tracts of geographic areas with higher levels of poverty in 2000 also had higher odds of losing health care facilities between 2000 and 2014 (aOR, 1.12; 95% CI, 1.05-1.19).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Differential change was found in the presence of health care facilities across neighborhoods over time, indicating the need to monitor and address the spatial distribution of health care resources within the context of population health disparities.

Geographic disparities in residential proximity to colorectal and cervical cancer care providers

BACKGROUND

Persistent rural-urban disparities for colorectal and cervical cancers raise concerns regarding access to treatment providers. To the authors knowledge, little is known regarding rural-urban differences in residential proximity to cancer specialists.

METHODS

Using the 2018 Physician Compare data concerning physician practice locations and the 2012 to 2016 American Community Survey, the current study estimated the driving distance from each residential zip code tabulation area (ZCTA) centroid to the nearest cancer provider of the following medical specialties involved in treating patients with colorectal and cervical cancer: medical oncology, radiation oncology, surgical oncology, general surgery, gynecological oncology, and colorectal surgery. Using population-weighted multivariable logistic regression, the authors analyzed the associations between ZCTA-level characteristics and driving distances >60 miles to each type of specialist. ZCTA-level residential rurality was defined using rural-urban commuting area codes.

RESULTS

Nearly 1 in 5 rural Americans lives >60 miles from a medical oncologist. Rural-urban differences in travel distances to the nearest cancer care provider(s) increased substantially for cancer surgeons; greater than one-half of rural residents were required to travel 60 miles to reach a gynecological oncologist, compared with 8 miles for their urban counterparts. Individuals residing within ZCTAs with a higher poverty rate, those of American Indian/Alaska Native ethnicity, and/or were located in the South and West regions were more likely than their counterparts to be >60 miles away from any of the aforementioned providers.

CONCLUSIONS

The substantial travel distances required for rural, low-income residents to reach a cancer specialist should prompt a policy action to increase access to specialized cancer care for millions of rural residents.

Cancer care in Brazil: structure and geographical distribution

Background

The organisation and systematisation of health actions and services are essential to ensure patient safety and the effectiveness and efficiency of cancer care. The objective of this study was to analyse the structure of cancer care envisaged in Brazilian norms, describe the types of accreditations of cancer services and their geographic distribution, and determine the planning and evaluation parameters used to qualify the health units that provide cancer care in Brazil.

Methods

This observational study identified the current organisation of cancer care and other health services that are accredited by Brazil’s national health system (SUS) for cancer treatment as of February 2017. The following information was collected from the current norms and the National Registry of Health Establishments: geographic location, type of accreditation, type of care, and hospital classification according to annual data of the number of cancer surgeries. The adequacy of the number of licensed units relative to population size was assessed. The analysis considered the facilitative or restrictive nature of policies based on the available rules and resources.

Results

The analysis of the norms indicated that these documents serve as structuring rules and resources for developing and implementing cancer care policies in Brazil. A total of 299 high-complexity oncology services were identified in facilities located in 173 (3.1%) municipalities. In some states, there were no authorised services in radiotherapy, paediatric oncology and/or haematology-oncology. There was a significant deficit in accredited oncology services.

Conclusions

The parameters that have been used to assess the need for accredited cancer services in Brazil are widely questioned because the best basis of calculation is the incidence of cancer or disease burden rather than population size. The results indicate that the availability of cancer services is insufficient and the organisation of the cancer care network needs to be improved in Brazil.

Attendance at National Cancer Institute and Children's Oncology Group Facilities for Children, Adolescents, and Young Adults with Cancer in Pennsylvania: A Population-Based Study

Purpose: Adolescents and young adults (AYAs) with cancer are a vulnerable population with decreased attendance at National Cancer Institute (NCI) comprehensive cancer centers and Children's Oncology Group (COG) facilities. Decreased attendance at NCI/COG facilities has been associated with poor cancer outcomes. The objective of this study was to evaluate cancer care patterns of AYAs compared with children, within Pennsylvania, and factors associated with attending an NCI/COG facility. Methods: Data from the Pennsylvania Cancer Registry between 2010 and 2015 for patients aged 0-39 years at cancer diagnosis were used. Primary analyses focused on age at diagnosis, insurance status, race, ethnicity, gender, cancer type, stage, diagnosis year, and distance to the NCI/COG facility. The primary outcome was receipt of care at an NCI/COG facility. Odds ratios (ORs) were calculated using multivariable logistic regression models. Sensitivity analyses were conducted to test and estimate robustness. Results: A sample of 15,002 patients, ages 0-39, was obtained, including 8857 patients (59%) who attended an NCI/COG facility. Patients were significantly less likely to attend an NCI/COG facility if they were aged 31-39 years (OR 0.054, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.04-0.07), non-White (OR 0.890, 95% CI 0.80-0.99), Hispanic (OR 0.701, 95% CI 0.59-0.83), female (OR 0.915, 95% CI 0.84-1.00), had Medicaid insurance (OR 0.836, 95% CI 0.75-0.93), and lived further from an NCI/COG facility. Sensitivity analyses largely corroborated the performed estimates. Conclusions: AYAs with cancer in Pennsylvania have disproportionate attendance at specialized NCI/COG facilities across a variety of demographic domains. Enhancing the attendance of AYAs with cancer at these specialized centers is crucial to improve cancer outcomes.

Disparities in Geographic Accessibility of National Cancer Institute Cancer Centers in the United States

The National Cancer Institute (NCI) Cancer Centers form the backbone of the cancer care system in the United States since their inception in the early 1970s. Most studies on their geographic accessibility used primitive measures, and did not examine the disparities across urbanicity or demographic groups. This research uses an advanced accessibility method, termed "2-step floating catchment area (2SFCA)" and implemented in Geographic Information Systems (GIS), to capture the degree of geographic access to NCI Cancer Centers by accounting for competition intensity for the services and travel time between residents and the facilities. The results indicate that urban advantage is pronounced as the average accessibility is highest in large central metro areas, declines to large fringe metro, medium metro, small metro, micropolitan and noncore rural areas. Population under the poverty line are disproportionally concentrated in lower accessibility areas. However, on average Non-Hispanic White have the lowest geographic accessibility, followed by Hispanic, Non-Hispanic Black and Asian, and the differences are statistically significant. The "reversed racial disadvantage" in NCI Cancer Center accessibility seems counterintuitive but is consistent with an influential prior study; and it is in contrast to the common observation of co-location of concentration of minority groups and people under the poverty line.