Targets for improving disparate head and neck cancer outcomes in the low-income population

Disparities in Care for Patients with Head and Neck Cancer

This article examines disparities in head and neck cancer across the cancer care continuum. It provides a public health lens to understand multilevel determinants of health behavior and the importance of social determinants of health. This article reviews the evidence base showing profound differences in incidence, treatment, and survival for patients with head and neck cancer by race, ethnicity, socioeconomic status, and geography. Continued research is needed to understand and address disparities for patients with head and neck cancer.

Association of Safety-Net Hospital Status With Outcomes Following Head and Neck Cancer Operations

OBJECTIVE

To assess perioperative and readmission outcomes of patients undergoing head and neck cancer (HNCA) surgery at safety-net hospitals (SNHs) in a modern cohort.

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study.

SETTING

Nationwide Readmissions Database (NRD), 2010 to 2019.

METHODS

All elective adult (≥18 years) admissions involving HNCA resection were identified from the NRD. To calculate safety-net burden, the proportion of Medicaid or uninsured patients admitted to each hospital for any indication was tabulated annually, with centers in the highest quartile defined as SNHs. To perform risk adjustment in assessing perioperative and readmission outcomes, multivariable regression models were developed.

RESULTS

Of an estimated 133,018 head and neck surgical patients, 26.5% (n = 35,268) received treatment at a SNH. Utilization of SNHs increased over the decade-long study period, with 29.8% of individuals treated at these sites in 2019. After multivariable adjustment, several patient factors were noted to be associated with SNHs, including younger age, lower comorbidity burden, and income within the lowest quartile. Although incidence of adverse events decreased at both SNHs and non-SNHs during the study period, treatment at SNHs remained associated with these events after risk adjustment (adjusted odds ratio: 1.17, 95% confidence interval: 1.08-1.28, P < .001).

CONCLUSION

SNHs continue to provide valuable specialty care to underserved populations, often with limited financial resources. Despite promising results from prior decades demonstrating comparable perioperative outcomes, the present study noted increased adverse events following HNCA surgery at these sites. Such findings underscore the need for continued advocacy to secure necessary funding for these centers.

The Impact of Race and the Affordable Care Act on Thyroid Carcinoma Outcomes: A National Cancer Database Study

OBJECTIVE

To assess the impact of race and the Affordable Care Act (ACA) of 2010 on disease presentation and overall survival for patients with well-differentiated thyroid carcinoma.

STUDY DESIGN

Cross-sectional study of patients (n = 51,078) who underwent partial or total thyroidectomy with or without postoperative radioactive iodine (RAI) for well-differentiated thyroid carcinoma between 2004 and 2018 in the National Cancer Database (NCDB).

METHODS

Cumulative survival (CS) was assessed with Cox proportional hazard regression analyses.

RESULTS

There were significant disparities in disease presentation at the time of diagnosis, with Black, Asian/Pacific Islander (API), and Hispanic patients were more likely to have metastatic disease (p < 0.001) and higher TNM stage (p < 0.001) at the time of diagnosis compared to White patients. Black patients had significantly increased risk of death (HR 1.147, 95%CI 1.021-1.289) but API patients had improved CS (HR 0.730, 95% CI 0.608-0.877) compared to White patients. Passage of the ACA was associated with lower risk of mortality, regardless of whether patients lived in states that did not expand Medicaid (HR 0.866, 95% CI 0.823-0.910) or whether they lived in expansion states (HR 0.818, 95% CI 0.758-0.884).

CONCLUSION

Racial disparities significantly impact thyroid carcinoma diagnosis and treatment in the United States but have improved over time. Both expansion and non-expansion states had improved survival outcomes over time, and suggesting analysis of the ACA's long-term impact and ability to address health inequities is still warranted.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level 3 Laryngoscope, 2024.

Elective Neck Dissection for cT1-4 N0M0 Head and Neck Verrucous Carcinoma

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the survival benefit of elective neck dissection (END) over neck observation in cT1-4 N0M0 head and neck verrucous carcinoma (HNVC).

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study.

SETTING

The 2006 to 2017 National Cancer Database.

METHODS

Patients with surgically resected cT1-4 N0M0 HNVC were selected. Linear, binary logistic, Kaplan-Meier, and Cox proportional hazards regression models were utilized.

RESULTS

Of 1015 patients satisfying inclusion criteria, 223 (22.0%) underwent END. The majority of patients were male (55.4%) and white (91.0%) with disease of the oral cavity (67.6%) classified as low grade (90.0%) and cT1-2 (81.8%). The minority of ENDs (4.0%) detected occult nodal metastases. The rate of END increased from 2006 to 2017 for both cT1-2 (16.3% vs 22.0%, p = .126, R2  = 0.405) and cT3-4 (41.7% vs 70.0%, p = .424, R2  = 0.232) disease but these trends were not statistically significant. Independent predictors of undergoing END included treatment at an academic facility (adjusted odds ratio [aOR]: 1.75, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.19-2.55), cT3-4 disease (aOR: 3.31, 95% CI: 2.16-5.07), and tumor diameter (aOR: 1.09, 95% CI: 1.01-1.19) (p < 0.05). The 5-year overall survival (OS) of patients treated with and without END was 71.3% and 70.6%, respectively (p = .661). END did not significantly reduce the 5-year hazard of death (adjusted hazard ratio: 1.25, 95% CI: 0.91-1.71, p = .172). END did not significantly improve 5-year OS in univariate and multivariate analyses stratified by several patient, facility, tumor, and treatment characteristics.

CONCLUSION

END does not confer an appreciable survival benefit in HNVC, even after stratifying univariate and multivariate analyses by several patient, facility, tumor, and treatment characteristics.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level 4.

Exploring social determinants of health: Comparing lower and higher income individuals participating in telepsychiatric care for depression

BACKGROUND

Telemental health may increase access to care; there has been little research on efficacy with those at the lower end of the income distribution. The purpose of this study was to determine whether lower vs. higher income patients receiving telepsychiatric care for depression achieve: (1) effective symptom reduction and (2) similar outcomes.

METHODS

Data utilized were obtained from a national mental health telehealth company and consisted of 5,426 U.S.-based patients receiving psychiatric care for moderate to severe depression between October, 2018 and January, 2022. Propensity matching was used to create lower and higher income samples (n = 379 in each) using 22 covariates. These samples were then compared using repeated measures ANOVA on Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9) scores at start of treatment, 6, 8, 10, 12, 14, and 16 weeks.

RESULTS

Both lower and higher income groups made significant improvement over time, with groups averaging mild symptom severity by week 16. There was a significant group x time interaction, such that the lower income group had significantly greater depression severity at the last two timepoints.

CONCLUSION

Lower and higher income groups both made significant improvement in depression symptom severity over time following initiation of psychiatric treatment via a telehealth platform, though higher income individuals, all else being equal besides employment, tend to do better. These findings suggest that when lower income individuals do participate in care, good outcomes can be achieved. Further research is needed to better understand the role social determinants of health (SDOH) play in outcome disparities.