Race, Age, Gender, and Insurance Status: A Comparative Analysis of Access to and Quality of Gastrointestinal Cancer Care

Reasons for Surgical Attrition Among Nonmetastatic Upper Gastrointestinal Cancer Patients: A Single Institutional Experience

INTRODUCTION

Upper gastrointestinal (UGI) cancers require multidisciplinary treatment, but surgery provides the only potentially curative option. We sought to understand reasons for attrition before surgery within our regional hospital network.

METHODS

We performed chart reviews of patients (age 18-80) with stage I-III UGI cancers (gastroesophageal junction, gastric, and hepatopancreatobiliary adenocarcinomas) in our multihospital cancer registry from 2015 to 2021. Our primary outcome was reasons for surgical attrition. Univariable analysis identified factors related to surgical attrition and the Kaplan-Meier method estimated overall survival based on surgery receipt.

RESULTS

Seven hundred and ninety-two patients were included in our analysis, of whom 107 (13.5%) did not undergo curative surgery. Reasons for not undergoing surgery included medical comorbidities (30.8%), patient preference/nonmedical barriers (24.3%, which included: not interested without further explanation, worried about complications, nonadherence to appointments, insurance issues, did not wish for blood transfusion, lack of social support, preferring home care, and worried about recurrence), psychosocial (5.6%), progression while on neoadjuvant therapy or waiting for transplant (15.0% and 7.5%), poor performance status (3.7%), side effects of neoadjuvant therapy (3.7%), and death unrelated to treatment or unknown cause (9.4%). Nonsurgical management was not associated with race, socioeconomic status, or distance traveled for care. Survival was greatly improved for patients who underwent surgery (158 vs. 63 weeks, p < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Nearly one in seven patients (18-80 years old) with UGI cancers evaluated at our academic cancer center did not undergo surgical resection. Reasons for surgical attrition included potentially modifiable issues, and addressing these barriers could help overcome inequities in cancer treatment and survival.

Impact of socioeconomic status on cancer care in Southeast Texas: a retrospective population-based cohort study

Background

Gastrointestinal (GI) cancers are the third leading cause of cancer-related mortality worldwide. Disparities in healthcare frequently stem from variations in socioeconomic status (SES). This study investigated the influence of socioeconomic factors such as gender, race, age, and geography on time to treatment initiation (TTI) and survival outcomes.

Methods

The study analyzed SES data, including age, race, geography, and insurance status, from GI cancer patients treated at Baptist Hospitals of Southeast Texas (BHSET) from 2012 to 2017. Logistic regression was performed for risk association. The primary outcomes were survival time and TTI.

Results

Of 517 GI cancer patients, 359 had colorectal cancer. African Americans had higher treatment delays (odds ratio [OR]: 5.89, confidence interval [CI]: 4.02-8.62) than Caucasians (OR: 0.16, CI: 0.11-0.23). Patients >80 years had poorer survival (OR: 2.91, CI: 1.80-4.72) than younger ones. Those living 30 + miles from BHSET had longer TTI (OR: 1.85, CI: 1.19-2.87), especially within the colorectal cancer cohort (OR: 2.20, CI: 1.29-3.74). Medicare Advantage was linked to longer TTI (OR: 1.50, CI: 1.01-2.23). Medicare patients without supplemental insurance had lower survival overall (OR: 1.79, CI: 1.05-3.06) and among colorectal cancer patients (OR: 2.13, CI: 1.14-3.98).

Conclusion

Addressing SES disparities and implementing targeted interventions is imperative to ensure equitable access to timely and effective cancer care.

African American and Hispanic Cancer Survivors' and Caregivers' Experiences in Nebraska

Racial and ethnic minority populations experience poorer cancer outcomes compared to non-Hispanic White populations, but qualitative studies have typically focused on single subpopulations. We explored experiences, perceptions, and attitudes toward cancer care services across the care continuum from screening through treatment among African American and Hispanic residents of Nebraska to identify unique needs for education, community outreach, and quality improvement. We conducted four focus groups (N = 19), April-August 2021 with people who were aged 30 or older and who self-identified as African American or Hispanic and as cancer survivors or caregivers. Sessions followed a structured facilitation guide, were audio recorded and transcribed, and were analyzed with a directed content analysis approach. Historical, cultural, and socioeconomic factors often led to delayed cancer care, such as general disuse of healthcare until symptoms were severe due to mistrust and cost of missing work. Obstacles to care included financial barriers, transportation, lack of support groups, and language-appropriate services (for Hispanic groups). Knowledge of cancer and cancer prevention varied widely; we identified a need for better community education about cancer within the urban Hispanic community. Participants had positive experiences and a sense of hope from the cancer care team. African American and Hispanic participants shared many similar perspectives about cancer care. Our results are being used in collaboration with national and regional cancer support organizations to expand their reach in communities of color, but structural and cultural barriers still need to be addressed.

Geographical Disparities in Esophageal Cancer Incidence and Mortality in the United States

BACKGROUND

Our previous research on neuroendocrine and gastric cancers has shown that patients living in rural areas have worse outcomes than urban patients. This study aimed to investigate the geographic and sociodemographic disparities in esophageal cancer patients.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective study on esophageal cancer patients between 1975 and 2016 using the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database. Both univariate and multivariable analyses were performed to evaluate overall survival (OS) and disease-specific survival (DSS) between patients residing in rural (RA) and urban (MA) areas. Further, we used the National Cancer Database to understand differences in various quality of care metrics based on residence.

RESULTS

N = 49,421 (RA [12%]; MA [88%]). The incidence and mortality rates were consistently higher during the study period in RA. Patients living in RA were more commonly males (p < 0.001), Caucasian (p < 0.001), and had adenocarcinoma (p < 0.001). Multivariable analysis showed that RA had worse OS (HR = 1.08; p < 0.01) and DSS (HR = 1.07; p < 0.01). Quality of care was similar, except RA patients were more likely to be treated at a community hospital (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Our study identified geographic disparities in esophageal cancer incidence and outcomes despite the similar quality of care. Future research is needed to understand and attenuate such disparities.

Patient- And Provider-Level Predictors of Survival Among Patients With Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Initiating Oral Anticancer Agents

PURPOSE

In an era of rapid expansion of FDA approvals for oral anticancer agents (OAAs), it is important to understand the factors associated with survival among real-world populations, which include groups not well-represented in pivotal clinical trials of OAAs, such as the elderly, racial minorities, and medically complex patients. Our objective was to evaluate patient- and provider-level characteristics' associations with mortality among a multi-payer cohort of metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) patients who initiated OAAs.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study was conducted using data from the North Carolina state cancer registry linked to multi-payer claims data for the years 2004 to 2015. Provider data were obtained from North Carolina Health Professions Data System and the National Plan & Provider Enumeration System. Included patients were individuals with mRCC who initiated an OAA and survived ≥90 days after beginning treatment. We estimated hazard ratios (HR) and corresponding 95% confidence limits (CL) using Cox hazard models for associations between patient demographics, patient clinical characteristics, provider-level factors, and 2-year all-cause mortality.

RESULTS

The cohort included 207 patients with mRCC who received OAAs. In multivariable models, clinical variables such as frailty (HR: 1.36, 95% CL: 1.11-1.67) and de novo metastatic diagnosis (HR: 2.63, 95%CL: 1.67-4.16) were associated with higher all-cause mortality. Additionally, patients solely on Medicare had higher adjusted all-cause mortality compared with patients with any private insurance (HR: 2.35, 95% CL: 1.32-4.18). No provider-level covariates investigated were associated with all-cause mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

Within a real-world population of mRCC patients taking OAAs, survival differed based on patient characteristics. In an era of rapid expansion of FDA approvals for OAAs, these real-world data underscore the continued importance of access to high-quality care, particularly for medically complex patients with limited resources.

Differential effects of the Affordable Care Act on the stage at presentation and receipt of treatment for pancreatic adenocarcinoma

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

For pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) which lacks a recommended screening modality, the benefit of the Affordable Care Act (ACA) may not be an earlier diagnosis, but rather improved rates of treatment. The objective of this study was to examine change in the stage of PDAC presentation and treatment disparities following the ACA.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study of patients with primary PDAC identified in the 2004-2017 National Cancer Database was divided into pre- and post-ACA, for which the primary outcomes of a stage of presentation, receipt of surgical resection, and systemic therapy (termed multimodality) (Stage I-II), and receipt of systemic therapy (Stage III-IV) were compared by multivariable analysis.

RESULTS

228,015 patients were included. Odds of presenting with Stage I-II PDAC were significantly higher in 2011-2017 versus 2004-2010 (odds ratio 1.44, 95% confidence interval 1.40-1.47). Black patients with early-stage disease had a lower likelihood of multimodality therapy and those with advanced disease were less likely to receive systemic therapy, before and after the ACA. Uninsured patients were less likely to receive any therapy compared with insured patients; this disparity increased in the post-ACA period.

CONCLUSIONS

An earlier presentation of PDAC increased following the ACA. However, racial, insurance, and socioeconomic treatment disparities persist.

Trends in Preoperative Chemotherapy Utilization for Proximal Pancreatic Cancer: Are We Making Progress?

BACKGROUND

While it has been shown that neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NCT) for pancreatic cancer (PDAC) undergoing pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) is critical for optimal oncologic management, NCT is (A) not universally practiced and (B) the reasons ill-defined. This study investigates national rates, trends, and factors affecting NCT utilization.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Using the National Cancer Database, patients who underwent PD for PDAC between 2006 and 2017 were identified. Changes in chemotherapy sequence over time were identified. For patients diagnosed after 2010, multivariable logistic regression models for factors affecting NCT were created.

RESULTS

A total of 128,980 patients were diagnosed and 23,206 underwent surgery. Three thousand five (12.9%) received NCT with a preoperative chemotherapy (NCT + PCT) utilization rate of 7.3% in 2004 that increased to 36.8% in 2017. Factors affecting utilization of preoperative chemotherapy were age (OR 0.972), academic and integrated network institutions (OR 1.916, OR 1.559), institutional case volume (OR 1.007), distance from the hospital (OR 1.002), stage (IB OR 3.108, IIA OR 3.133, IIB OR 3.775, III OR 3.782), grade IV (OR 1.977), and insurance status (private OR 2.371, Medicaid OR 1.811, and Medicare OR 2.191, government OR 2.645).

CONCLUSION

Even though more than 3/5 of patients receive no preoperative chemotherapy (NCT + PCT) and nearly 1/5 of patients still receive no chemotherapy at all, utilization of NCT is increasing. Moreover, since this study demonstrates that omission of NCT is associated with modifiable factors such as type of institution and health care disparity, mechanisms (reimbursement, policy) geared to change current national practice patterns may most immediately affect optimal oncologic management.

High-Quality Surgery for Gallbladder Carcinoma: Rare, Associated with Disparity, and Not Substitutable by Chemotherapy

BACKGROUND

Oncologic surgery for T1b-T3 gallbladder carcinoma (GBC) consists of gallbladder fossa resection or bisegmentectomy IVb/V with negative margins and portal/retropancreatic lymphadenectomy. Frequency of high quality oncologic surgery, factors associated with its use, and the ability of chemotherapy to rescue low-quality surgery (LQS) remain unknown.

METHODS

The NCDB was queried for patients diagnosed with stage I-III (T1b-T3) GBC undergoing curative-intent surgery from 2004 to 2016. These patients were divided into two groups based on receiving high quality surgery (HQS) or not; HQS was defined as cholecystectomy with partial hepatectomy, lymph node harvest ≥ 6, and negative margins. Logistic regression and Kaplan-Meier survival analyses were performed.

RESULTS

A total of 3796 patients met inclusion criteria; only 364 (9.6%) met HQS criteria, and 3432 (90.4%) did not achieve HQS and were deemed low-quality surgery (LQS). HQS was associated with improved median overall survival (55.1 vs. 25.5 months, P < .001). Adjuvant chemotherapy (AC) was not able to rescue LQS with poorer survival compared to HQS without AC (27.9 vs 55.1 months, P < .001). Factors associated with HQS included private insurance (OR 1.809, P < .001), higher income (OR 1.380, P = .038), urban/rural residence (vs metropolitan) (OR 1.641, P = .001), higher education (OR 1.342, P = .031), Medicaid expansion states (OR 1.405, P = .005), stage 3 GBC (OR 1.642, P = .020), and reresection (OR 2.685, P < .001). Factors associated with LQS included older age (OR 0.974, P < .001), comorbidities (OR 0.701, P = .004), and laparoscopic approach (0.579, P < .001). Facility type incrementally improved HQS rate (integrated cancer network vs. comprehensive community, 9.8% vs. 6.1%, OR 1.694, P = .003; academic/research center vs. integrated cancer network, 14.9% vs. 9.8%, OR 1.599, P = .003).

CONCLUSION

While HQS for GBC strongly improves survival, it is infrequently practiced. The newly identified factors that improve survival for GBC, such as centralization, open approach, and insurance coverage, are modifiable and, therefore, should be considered to achieve optimal outcomes.

Social Vulnerability Subtheme Analysis Improves Perioperative Risk Stratification in Hepatopancreatic Surgery

BACKGROUND

There has been increased interest in understanding how social determinants of health (SDH) may affect care both in the medical and surgical setting. We sought to define the impact of various aspects of social vulnerability on the ability of patients to achieve a "textbook outcome" (TO) following hepatopancreatic surgery.

METHODS

Medicare beneficiaries who underwent hepatopancreatic resection between 2013 and 2017 were identified using the Medicare database. Social vulnerability was defined using the Centers for Disease Control Social Vulnerability Index (SVI), which is comprised of four subthemes: socioeconomic (SE), household composition and disability (HCD), minority status and language (MSL), and housing type and transportation (HTT). TO was defined as the composite endpoint: absence of 90-day mortality or readmission, absence of an extended length of stay (LOS), and no complications during the index admission. Cluster analysis was used to identify vulnerability cohorts, and multivariable logistic regression was utilized to assess the impact of these SVI subthemes on the likelihood to achieve a textbook outcome.

RESULTS

Among 37,707 Medicare beneficiaries, 64.9% (n = 24,462) of patients underwent pancreatic resection while 35.1% (n = 13,245) underwent hepatic resection. Median patient age was 72 years (IQR: 68-77), just over one-half were male (51.9%; n = 19,558), and the median CCI was 3 (IQR: 2-8). Cluster analysis revealed five distinct SVI profiles with wide variability in the distribution of SVI subthemes, ranging from 15 (profile 1 IQR: 7-26) to 83 (profile 5 IQR: 66-93). The five profiles were grouped into 3 categories based on median composite SVI: "low vulnerability" (profile 1), "average vulnerability" (profiles 2 and 3), or "high vulnerability" (profiles 4 and 5). The rate of TO ranged from 44.6% in profile 5 (n = 4022) to 49.2% in profile 1 (n = 4836). Multivariable analyses comparing patients categorized into the two average SVI profiles revealed that despite having similar composite SVI scores, the risk of adverse postoperative outcomes was not similar. Specifically, patients from profile 5 had lower odds of achieving a TO (OR 0.89, 95%CI: 0.83-0.95) and higher odds of 90-day mortality (OR 1.29, 95%CI: 1.15-1.44) versus patients in profile 4.

CONCLUSION

Distinct profiles of SVI subtheme characteristics were independently associated with postoperative outcomes among Medicare beneficiaries undergoing HP surgery, even among patients with similar overall composite SVI scores.

Awareness of Hospice Care Among Rural African-Americans: Findings From Social Determinants of Health Framework

Background: Despite the need for hospice care as our society ages, adults in the U.S.'s southern rural region have limited awareness of hospice care. Objective: This study aims to assess the rate of awareness of hospice care among rural residents living in Alabama's Black Belt region and examine social determinants of health (SDH) associated with the awareness. Methods: A cross-sectional survey was conducted among a convenience sample living in Alabama's Black Belt region (N = 179, age = 18-91). Participants' awareness of hospice care, demographic characteristics (ie, age and gender), and SDH (ie, financial resources strain, food insecurity, education and health literacy, social isolation, and interpersonal safety) were assessed. Lastly, a binary logistic regression was used to examine the association between SDH and hospice awareness among participants while controlling for demographic characteristics. Results: The majority of participants had heard of hospice care (n = 150, 82.1%), and older participants (50 years old or older) were more likely to report having heard of hospice care (OR = 7.35, P < 0.05). Participants reporting worries about stable housing (OR = 0.05, P < 0.05) and higher social isolation were less likely to have heard of hospice care (OR = 0.53, P < 0.05), while participants with higher health literacy had a higher likelihood to have heard of it (OR = 2.60, P < 0.01). Conclusions: Our study is the first study assessing the status of hospice awareness among residents of Alabama's Black Belt region. This study highlighted that factors including age and certain SDH (ie, housing status, health literacy, and social isolation) might be considered in the intervention to improve hospice awareness.