Survival differences among American Indians/Alaska natives with head and neck squamous cell carcinoma

Patient Factors Associated with Missed Otolaryngology Appointments at an Urban Safety-Net Hospital

OBJECTIVE

To determine if patient factors related to ethnicity, socioeconomic status (SES), medical comorbidities, or appointment characteristics increase the risk of missing an initial adult otolaryngology appointment.

METHODS

This study is a retrospective case control study at Boston Medical Center (BMC) in Boston, Massachusetts, that took place in 2019. Patient demographic and medical comorbidity data as well as appointment characteristic data were collected and compared between those that attended their initial otolaryngology appointment versus those who missed their initial appointment. Chi-square and ANOVA tests were used to calculate differences between attendance outcomes. Multivariate analysis was used to compare the odds of missing an appointment based on various patient- and appointment-related factors.

RESULTS

Patients who were more likely to miss their appointments were more often female, of lower education, disabled, not employed, Black or Hispanic, and Spanish-speaking. Spring and Fall appointments were more likely to be missed. When a multivariate regression was conducted to control for social determinants of health (SDOH) such as race, insurance status, employment, and education status, the odds of females, Spanish-speaking, students, and disabled patients missing their appointment were no longer statistically significant.

CONCLUSION

A majority of patients at BMC come from lower SES backgrounds and have multiple medical comorbidities. Those who reside closer to BMC, often areas of lower average income, had higher rates of missed appointments. Interventions such as decreasing lag time, providing handicap-accessible free transportation, and increasing accessibility of telemedicine for patients could help improve attendance rates at BMC.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

IV Laryngoscope, 134:4003-4010, 2024.

Racial Disparities in Head and Neck Cancer: It's Not Just About Access

OBJECTIVE

Medical literature identifies stark racial disparities in head and neck cancer (HNC) in the United States, primarily between non-Hispanic white (NHW) and non-Hispanic black (NHB) populations. The etiology of this disparity is often attributed to inequitable access to health care and socioeconomic status (SES). However, other contributors have been reported. We performed a systematic review to better understand the multifactorial landscape driving racial disparities in HNC.

DATA SOURCES

A systematic review was conducted in Covidence following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses Guidelines. A search of PubMed, SCOPUS, and CINAHL for literature published through November 2022 evaluating racial disparities in HNC identified 2309 publications.

REVIEW METHODS

Full texts were screened by 2 authors independently, and inconsistencies were resolved by consensus. Three hundred forty publications were ultimately selected and categorized into themes including disparities in access/SES, treatment, lifestyle, and biology. Racial groups examined included NHB and NHW patients but also included Hispanic, Native American, and Asian/Pacific Islander patients to a lesser extent.

RESULTS

Of the 340 articles, 192 focused on themes of access/SES, including access to high-quality hospitals, insurance coverage, and transportation contributing to disparate HNC outcomes. Additional themes discussed in 148 articles included incongruities in surgical recommendations, tobacco/alcohol use, human papillomavirus-associated malignancies, and race-informed silencing of tumor suppressor genes.

CONCLUSION

Differential access to care plays a significant role in racial disparities in HNC, disproportionately affecting NHB populations. However, there are other significant themes driving racial disparities. Future studies should focus on providing equitable access to care while also addressing these additional sources of disparities in HNC.

Otolaryngology Care Disparities in American Indian Populations

Our objectives were to quantify geographical disparities in otolaryngology care access with respect to American Indian (AI) populations and to identify gaps in care. Although increased incidence and mortality rates of ear, nose, and throat (ENT) conditions in AI populations are well documented, few studies address factors contributing to these differential outcomes. We conducted a cross-sectional study of US states with AI areas that either met the population threshold for the American Community Survey annual estimate or annual supplemental estimate. A 2-tailed t test was used to compare the geographic distribution of ENT providers practicing within AI areas against non-AI areas, showing a statistically significant difference (P < .001) in the concentration of providers (0.409 vs 2.233 providers per 100,000 patients). To our knowledge, this is the first study to explore geographic barriers contributing to AI disparities within otolaryngology.

Disparities in the prevalence of self-reported dysphagia and treatment among U.S. adults

OBJECTIVE

To assess sociodemographic differences in the prevalence of self-reported dysphagia and treatment and to identify barriers in access to care.

STUDY DESIGN

Cross-sectional analysis.

SETTING

National healthcare survey database.

METHODS

The 2012 National Health Interview Survey was used to analyze adults who reported a swallowing problem in the prior 12 months. Associations of sociodemographic variables with dysphagia prevalence and treatment as well as access to care were determined by multivariate logistic regression.

RESULTS

Among 235 million adults in the United States, 9.4 ± 0.3 million (4.0 % ± 0.1 %) adults (mean age 52.1 ± 0.6 years; 60.2 % female) reported swallowing problems, only 19.2 % ± 2.0 % of whom reported receiving treatment or therapy for their swallowing problem. In a multivariate model controlling for sociodemographic factors, female gender, older age, lower income level, public insurance status and unemployment were independently associated with increased odds of reporting dysphagia, while also associated with decreased odds of receiving treatment. Conversely, Black, Hispanic and other racial/ethnic minorities were less likely to report swallowing problems, but among those who did report dysphagia, non-white adults were more likely to receive treatment. Barriers leading to delayed care for women, low-income adults and adults with public or no health insurance included cost, not being able to get an appointment soon enough, limited office hours, inability to get through to an office by phone, lack of transportation, and long office wait times.

CONCLUSION

Sociodemographic groups at higher risk for dysphagia are less likely to receive treatment. Targeted interventions are needed to address barriers to care.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

IV.

A Systematic Review of Head and Neck Cancer Health Disparities: A Call for Innovative Research

OBJECTIVE

(1) Describe the existing head and neck cancer health disparities literature. (2) Contextualize these studies by using the NIMHD research framework (National Institute on Minority Health and Health Disparities). (3) Explore innovative ideas for further study and intervention.

DATA SOURCES

Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, and Google Scholar.

REVIEW METHODS

Databases were systematically searched from inception to April 20, 2020. The PRISMA checklist was followed (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses). Two authors reviewed all articles for inclusion. Extracted data included health disparity population and outcomes, study details, and main findings and recommendations. Articles were also classified per the NIMHD research framework.

RESULTS

There were 148 articles included for final review. The majority (n = 104) focused on health disparities related to at least race/ethnicity. Greater than two-thirds of studies (n = 105) identified health disparities specific to health behaviors or clinical outcomes. Interaction between the individual domain of influence and the health system level of influence was most discussed (n = 99, 66.9%). Less than half of studies (n = 61) offered specific recommendations or interventions.

CONCLUSIONS

There has been extensive study of health disparities for head and neck cancer, largely focusing on individual patient factors or health care access and quality. This review identifies gaps in this research, with large numbers of retrospective database studies and little discussion of potential contributors and explanations for these disparities. We recommend shifting research on disparities upstream toward a focus on community and societal factors, rather than individual, and an evaluation of interventions to promote health equity.

Head and Neck Cancer among American Indian and Alaska Native Populations in California, 2009-2018

Simple Summary

In the United States, it is estimated there will be 54,000 new cases of oral cavity and pharyngeal cancer in 2021. Tobacco exposure and drinking alcohol are the main causes of head and neck cancer (HNC). Human Papilloma Virus (HPV) is now increasing in prevalence and is the most common cause of oropharyngeal cancer in the United States. This study assessed the incidence of HNC and HPV status in American Indian/Alaska Native (AI/AN) populations in California and determined if incidence was higher among AI/ANs compared to other ethnicities. We found that AI/AN and White patients had the highest burden of late-stage HNC and HPV+ lip, oral cavity, and pharynx cancer compared to other ethnicities. In addition, AI/ANs had a decreased survival rate compared to White patients. These findings reveal ethnic or racial differences in incidence, presentation, and survival, and should inform future preventative care measures for the AI/AN population.

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to determine the incidence of HPV-positive (HPV+) and HPV-negative (HPV-) head and neck cancer (HNC) in the American Indian/Alaska Native (AI/AN) population in California to assess whether incidence is higher among AI/ANs compared to other ethnicities. We analyzed data from the California Cancer Registry, which contains data reported to the Cancer Surveillance Section of the Department of Public Health. A total of 51,289 HNC patients were identified for the years 2009–2018. Outcomes of interest included sex, stage at presentation, 5-year survival rate, tobacco use, and HPV status. AI/AN and White patients had the highest burden of late stage HNC (AI/AN 6.3:100,000; 95% CI 5.3–7.4, White 5.8:100,000; 95% CI 5.7–5.9) compared to all ethnicities or races (Black: 5.2; 95% CI 4.9–5.5; Asian/Pacific Islander: 3.2; 95% CI 3–3.3; and Hispanic: 3.1; 95% CI 3–3.2 per 100,000). Additionally, AI/AN and White patients had the highest burden of HPV+ lip, oral cavity, and pharynx HNC (AI/AN 0.9:100,000; 95% CI 0.6–1.4, White 1.1:100,000; 95% CI 1–1.1) compared to all ethnicities or races (Black: 0.8:100,000; 95% CI 0.7–0.9; Asian/Pacific Islander: 0.4; 95% CI 0.4–0.5; and Hispanic: 0.6; 95% CI 0.5–0.6). AI/ANs had a decreased 5-year survival rate compared to White patients (AI/AN 59.9%; 95% CI 51.9–67.0% and White 67.7%; 95% CI 67.00–68.50%) and a higher incidence of HNC in former and current tobacco users. These findings underscore the disparities that exist in HNC for California AI/AN populations. Future studies should aim to elucidate why the unequal burden of HNC outcomes exists, how to address increased tobacco usage, and HPV vaccination patterns to create culturally and community-based interventions.

Association between social determinants of health and olfactory function: a scoping review

BACKGROUND

Social determinants of health (SDoH) include the socioeconomic, demographic, and social conditions that influence differences in health status among individuals and groups. The impact of these conditions on olfactory function remains poorly understood. In this scoping review, we systematically review the available literature to synthesize the association between SDoH and olfactory function.

METHODS

In accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Review (PRISMA-ScR) guidelines, we performed systematic search queries in PubMed, Embase, and Ovid databases and categorized articles according to themes that emerged regarding SDoH. The primary outcomes included self-reported and objective measurements of smell.

RESULTS

We identified 722 unique references that underwent title and abstract review by two independent reviewers, with 70 articles undergoing full-text review and 57 relevant for data extraction. Six themes emerged in our review, under which we categorized the studies and synthesized respective associations with olfactory function. These include studies exploring socioeconomic status (n = 19, 33%), education status (n = 27, 47%), occupational exposures (n = 26, 46%), racial/ethnic disparities (n = 12, 21%), and lifestyle/behavioral factors (n = 33, 58%).

CONCLUSIONS

Within the context of this scoping review, olfactory dysfunction is significantly more prevalent in patients with lower socioeconomic status, exposure to environmental and occupational toxins, and of minority race/ethnicity, whereas the associations between olfactory dysfunction and education level and lifestyle factors such as smoking and drinking seem to be much more elusive. This review highlights the importance of accounting for SDoH in observational studies examining olfactory outcomes. Given the increased awareness of olfactory loss, special consideration should be given to understanding olfactory dysfunction in the context of these factors.

An educational intervention on HPV knowledge and comfortability discussing vaccination among oral health care professionals of the American Indian and Alaskan Native population

This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of an educational intervention at improving Oral Health Professionals (OHP's) knowledge of HPV and comfortability to discuss vaccination with their American Indian and Alaskan Native patients. OHP's attended an educational lecture covering HPV vaccination. Participants completed four validated questionnaires that encompassed a sociodemographic survey, a pre-lecture questionnaire (pre-Q), a post-lecture questionnaire (post-Q), and a follow-up questionnaire (follow-Q). The McNemar test was used to assess the significance of marginal probabilities in the responses between the pre-Q and post-Q and the Chi-square test to assess responses between the post-Q and follow-Q. A total of 122 OHP's completed the sociodemographic survey, pre-Q, and post-Q. Among these, 29 OHP's completed the eight-week follow-Q. The majority of all the participants were White/Caucasian (41%), 31 to 60 years of age (72%), females (64%), and held a graduate/professional degree (52%). Analysis of the pre-Q responses showed that only 6.8% of OHP's discuss the connection between HPV and oropharyngeal cancer with patients and a lack of information on the topic was the major barrier reported. After the educational intervention (post-Q), 86.5% of OHP's reported they were more likely to recommend the HPV vaccine and 69.8% felt more comfortable administering it. Comparison between the pre-Q and the post-Q showed a significant improvement in overall HPV knowledge. Similarly, a comparison between the post-Q and the follow-Q showed retained knowledge overtime. Our study suggests that the educational intervention was effective at improving OHP's knowledge of HPV and enhancing their comfortability and preparedness to discuss the vaccination with their patients.

Change in Age at Diagnosis of Oropharyngeal Cancer in the United States, 1975-2016

Simple Summary

While previous studies have suggested that HPV-associated head and neck cancer (HNC) is mostly in the younger population, we found that in the last 40 years, the mean age at diagnosis of oropharyngeal cancer has been 60.3 years. We found that after an initially decrease leading up to the early 2000s, there has been a steady increase in age at diagnosis of oropharyngeal cancer since 2002. For non-oropharyngeal HNC, mean age at diagnosis has steadily increased throughout the last four decades. Finally, we found that age at diagnosis of HNC is higher among females in general, and lowest among blacks.

Abstract

The emergence of the human papillomavirus (HPV) as the primary etiology of oropharyngeal cancer has changed head and neck cancer (HNC) epidemiology. This study described change in the age at diagnosis of oropharyngeal and non-oropharyngeal HNC in the United States in the last four decades. Using a retrospective cohort analysis, the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results dataset from 1975 to 2016 was queried for eligible adult cases of HNC, grouped as oropharyngeal (n = 31,702) versus non-oropharyngeal (n = 87,108). Age at diagnosis was compared by gender (female, male) using independent t-test, and by race/ethnicity (Hispanic, non-Hispanic black, non-Hispanic white, non-Hispanic other) using analysis of variance. Joinpoint regression estimated yearly increases/decreases in age of diagnosis by sex and race/ethnicity through annual percent changes (APC), which were summarized with average annual percent changes (AAPC). Mean age at diagnosis for oropharyngeal cancer was 60.3 years. While there was initially a decrease in age at diagnosis, a 0.37% annual increase occurred from 2002 to 2016 (APC = 0.37, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.28, 0.45). For non-oropharyngeal cancer, mean age at diagnosis was 63.2 years, with a continuous increase in age at diagnosis throughout the study period (1975–2016 AAPC = 0.08, 95% CI 0.04, 0.12). Females had higher average age at diagnosis than males for both sites, while blacks (57.4 years for oropharyngeal cancer; 59.0 years for non-oropharyngeal) had the lowest age at diagnosis of all races/ethnicity. Age at diagnosis of oropharyngeal cancer has increased significantly since 2002, while non-oropharyngeal HNC has increased significantly in the last four decades.

Population analysis of socioeconomic status and otolaryngologist distribution on head and neck cancer outcomes

BACKGROUND

The relationship between clinical outcomes and geographic determinants is not well known for head and neck cancer. Socioeconomic status (SES) factors and the distribution of health care resources might impact outcomes.

METHODS

Head and neck cancer cases in the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database were studied. Patient-level prognostic factors were identified from the SEER, and county-level factors were identified from the Area Health Resource File. Stage at presentation and observed survival were the outcomes of interest, with predictive factors identified by multivariate logistic and Cox proportional hazards regression.

RESULTS

On multivariate analysis, tumor site, sex, race, marital status, rural residence, and county poverty level predicted stage at presentation. Sex, race, marital status, county-level poverty, and number of otolaryngologists predicted observed survival.

CONCLUSION

Adverse county-level SES predicted advanced cancer stage at presentation and diminished observed survival. SES was a stronger predictor of patient outcomes than rurality or number of otolaryngologists.

Association of Socioeconomic Status, Race and Insurance Status with Chronic Rhinosinusitis Patient-Reported Outcome Measures

Objective Disparities in health and health care access are widely prevalent. However, disparities among patients with chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) are poorly understood. We investigated if CRS severity at presentation according to socioeconomic factors. Study Design Cross-sectional study. Setting Tertiary rhinology center. Subjects and Methods Three hundred prospectively recruited patients presenting with CRS were included. Outcome variables included CRS symptomatology, as reflected by the 22-item Sinonasal Outcome Test (SNOT-22); general health status, as reflected by the EuroQol 5-dimensional visual analog scale (EQ-5D VAS); and CRS-related antibiotic and systemic corticosteroid use. Race/ethnicity, zip code income bracket, education level, and insurance status were used as predictor variables. Regression, controlling for clinical and demographic characteristics, was used to determine associations between predictor and outcome variables. Results Mean SNOT-22 score was 33.8 (SD, 23.2), and mean EQ-5D VAS score was 74.2 (SD, 18.9). On multivariable analysis, presenting SNOT-22 and EQ-5D VAS scores were not associated with nonwhite patient race/ethnicity ( P = .634 and P = .866), education ( P = .106 and P = .586), or the percentage of households in zip code with incomes <$50,000 per year ( P = .917 and P = .979, respectively). SNOT-22 scores did not differ by insurance type, but patients receiving Medicare reported worse general health status. Use of oral antibiotics or oral steroids for CRS was not associated with predictor variables. Conclusion Patients with CRS presented to a tertiary rhinology center with similar metrics for CRS severity and pre-presentation medical management regardless of race/ethnicity, education status, or zip code income level. Patients with Medicare had worse general health status. Further research should investigate potential disparities in diagnosis of CRS, specialist referral, and treatment outcomes.

Disparities in health in the United States: An overview of the social determinants of health for otolaryngologists

Objectives

Social determinants of health include social and demographic factors such as poverty, education status, race and ethnicity, gender, insurance status, and other factors that influence (1) development of illness, (2) ability to obtain and utilize healthcare, and (3) health and healthcare outcomes. In otolaryngology, as in other subspecialty surgical fields, we are constantly confronted by patients’ social and demographic circumstances including poverty, language barriers, and lack of health insurance and yet there is limited research on how these factors impact health equity in our field, or how attention to these patient characteristics may improve health equity. This review provides the reader with a framework to understand the social determinants of health including how socioeconomic status, insurance status, race, gender, and other factors impact health.

Data Sources and Review Methods

Foundational papers on the social determinants of health are reviewed, as well as otolaryngology publications focused on health and healthcare disparities.

Results

The social determinants of health have a major impact on patient health as well as healthcare utilization, but there is a relative lack of data on these factors and how they can be addressed within otolaryngology. Incorporating tools to measure social and demographic characteristics and actually report on these measures is a first simple step to increase the data on the social determinants of health as they pertain to otolaryngology.

Conclusion

More research is needed on the social determinants of health, and how they impact otolaryngic disease. Medicare's Accountable Care Organization models will increasingly change the way in which physicians are reimbursed, making the social determinants of health central not only to our moral conscience but also the bottom line.

Level of Evidence

4

Racial disparities in preventable risk factors for head and neck cancer

OBJECTIVES/HYPOTHESIS

To demonstrate racial differences in preventable risk behaviors/practices that contribute to head and neck cancer (HNCA).

STUDY DESIGN

Cross-sectional analysis of large national risk factor survey.

METHODS

The Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System for 2013 was analyzed. Demographic data were extracted, including age, sex, and race. Social habits considered risk factors for HNCA were also extracted, including alcohol consumption, smoking, and human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination status. Statistical comparisons were conducted according to race for each risk factor, and additional comparisons were conducted within the American Indian population subgroup for risk factors according to sex.

RESULTS

A total of 238.6 million Americans were surveyed. American Indians reported higher rates of binge drinking (19.0%) than whites (17.3%), blacks (12.4%), and Asian Americans (13.1%; P < .001). This rate was significantly higher for American Indian males (23.5%) versus females (13.7%; P < .001). Mean total drinks per month was higher for whites and American Indians (13.5 and 13.5; P < .001). American Indians reported the highest rates of current smoking (28.1%), followed by blacks (20.1%), whites (18.3%), and Asians (10.2%; P < .001). American Indians also reported the highest rates of every day smoking (18.2%), versus whites (13.3%), blacks (13.1%), and Asians (6.1%; P < .001). Rates of HPV vaccination were lowest for American Indians (11.7%), compared to whites (14.6%), blacks (13.6%), and Asians (12%; P = 0.618).

CONCLUSIONS

There are striking racial disparities in the prevalence of preventable risk factors for HNCA. These data highlight the need for targeted education and prevention programs in particular racial groups.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

4. Laryngoscope, 127:1068-1072, 2017.

A critical review of methods for assessing cancer survival disparities in indigenous population

PURPOSE

An increasing cancer burden among indigenous populations has led to a growing literature about survival disparities between indigenous and nonindigenous persons. We aim to describe and appraise methods used to measure cancer survival in indigenous persons in the United States, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand.

METHODS

We searched Medline, Web of Science, and EMBASE for articles published between 1990 and 2015 that estimated survival in populations indigenous to one of these four countries. We gathered information about data sources, analytical methods, and the extent to which threats to validity were discussed.

RESULTS

The search retrieved 83 articles. The most common approach to survival analysis was cause-specific survival (n = 49). Thirty-eight articles measured all-cause survival and 11 measured excess mortality attributable to cancer (relative survival). Three sources of information bias common to all studies (ethnic misclassification, incomplete case ascertainment, and incomplete death ascertainment) were acknowledged in a minority of articles.

CONCLUSIONS

The methodological considerations we present here are shared with studies of cancer survival across other subpopulations. We urge future researchers on this and related topics to clearly describe their data sources, to justify analytic choices, and to fully discuss the potential impact of those choices on the results and interpretation.

Knowledge and screening of head and neck cancer among American Indians in South Dakota

OBJECTIVES

We established the level of awareness of risk factors and early symptoms of head and neck cancer among American Indians in South Dakota and determined whether head and neck cancer screening detected clinical findings in this population.

METHODS

We used the European About Face survey. We added questions about human papillomavirus, a risk factor for head and neck cancer, and demographics. Surveys were administered at 2 public events in 2011. Participants could partake in a head and neck cancer screening at the time of survey administration.

RESULTS

Of the 205 American Indians who completed the survey, 114 participated in the screening. Mean head and neck cancer knowledge scores were 26 out of 44. Level of education was the only factor that predicted higher head and neck cancer knowledge (b = 0.90; P = .01). Nine (8%) people had positive head and neck cancer screening examination results. All abnormal clinical findings were in current or past smokers (P = .06).

CONCLUSIONS

There are gaps in American Indian knowledge of head and neck cancer risk factors and symptoms. Community-based head and neck cancer screening in this population is feasible and may be a way to identify early abnormal clinical findings in smokers.

Poor Survival for American Indians with Head and Neck Squamous Cell Carcinoma

OBJECTIVE

To examine patient characteristics, treatment modalities, and human papillomavirus (HPV) prevalence to identify potential mediators of disparities that may lead to differences in outcomes for American Indians with head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC).

STUDY DESIGN

Historical cohort study.

SETTING

Community cancer centers.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We reviewed all patients older than 18 years with a new diagnosis of HNSCC in South Dakota from 1999 to 2009. We assessed tissue samples from cases of oropharyngeal cancer for the presence of HPV DNA.

RESULTS

In total, 474 white patients were compared with 32 American Indians. American Indians experienced significantly worse survival compared with whites (hazard ratio [HR], 0.59; P = .05), even after controlling for other factors such as age, sex, distance, Charlson comorbidity index, alcohol abuse, smoking, insurance, and disease stage. American Indians had a greater risk of alcohol abuse (68% vs 42%; P = .008), current smoking (67% vs 49%; P = .03), living more than 1 hour from a cancer center (81% vs 30%; P < .001), lacking private insurance (24% vs 68%; P < .001), and late-stage disease presentation (stages III and IV) (74% vs 55%; P = .04). There were no detected differences in age, sex, medical comorbidities, tumor site, tumor grade, HPV status, time to treatment, or type of treatment received.

CONCLUSION

American Indians in South Dakota with HNSCC have poorer survival compared with white patients. Once presented to a cancer center, American Indians received nearly identical treatment to white patients. Disparities in outcomes arise primarily due to sociodemographic factors and later stage at presentation.