Project ECHO for Cancer Care: a Scoping Review of Provider Outcome Evaluations

Updates in global oncology: Advancements and future directions

Globally, cancer is the second leading cause of death, and low- and middle-income countries bear most of the disease burden. While cancer is increasingly recognized as a major global health issue, more work remains. Understanding the status of global cancer care will shape the next steps in ensuring equitable global access to cancer care. This article highlights ongoing initiatives in global oncology and the next steps in advancing the field.

Telehealth in Cancer Care: Inequities, Barriers, and Opportunities

ABSTRACT

Telecommunications technology began to be integrated into health care delivery by the mid-1900s, with the goal of increasing access to care including access to cancer care.There have been at least 3 significant telehealth expansion periods, with the most recent related to the COVID-19 pandemic. Technology uptake increased in the 1990s as quality improved, costs came down, and usability factors were addressed. As telehealth practice transitioned to use of personal devices, the COVID-19 pandemic arose, and necessity compelled widespread telehealth uptake. Most patients and clinicians entered the pandemic with little if any telehealth experience and often no training on using personal devices to access health care. Teleoncology data reveal cancer care feasibility and acceptability with generally high levels of satisfaction for both patients and clinicians. Sustaining the progress made in telehealth uptake requires ongoing insurance coverage with parity in coverage, licensure facilitation, and ongoing development of technology that is easy to use. In addition, to tele-cancer care appointments, the technology may be used for care coordination, education, and increased access to cancer clinical trials.

Rutgers Cancer Institute of New Jersey's Community Outreach and Engagement Approach to Cancer Prevention

Rutgers Cancer Institute of New Jersey (New Brunswick, NJ) is committed to providing cancer prevention education, outreach, and clinical services in our catchment area (CA). Our approach to cancer prevention includes ongoing surveillance to better understand the CA cancer burden and opportunities for intervention, leveraging community partnerships, and vigorously engaging diverse communities to understand and address their needs. This approach considers individual, sociocultural, environmental, biologic, system, and policy-level factors with an equity lens. Rutgers Cancer Institute has had substantial impact on cancer prevention (risk reduction, screening, and early detection) over the past five years, including the development of a CA data dashboard advancing implementation of evidence-based cancer control actions by leveraging 357 healthcare and community partners (with 522 partner sites). Furthermore, we provided professional education (attendance 19,397), technical assistance to community organizations (1,875 support sessions), educational outreach for community members (87,000+ through direct education), facilitated access to preventive services (e.g., 60,000+ screenings resulting in the detection of >2,000 malignant and premalignant lesions), contributed to advances in health policy and population-level improvements in risk reduction behaviors, screening, and incidence. With longer-term data, we will assess the impact of our cancer prevention efforts on cancer incidence, downward shifts in stage at diagnosis, mortality, and disparities.

Geographic Disparities in Potential Accessibility to Gynecologic Oncologists in the United States From 2001 to 2020

OBJECTIVE

To use a spatial modeling approach to capture potential disparities of gynecologic oncologist accessibility in the United States at the county level between 2001 and 2020.

METHODS

Physician registries identified the 2001-2020 gynecologic oncology workforce and were aggregated to each county. The at-risk cohort (women aged 18 years or older) was stratified by race and ethnicity and rurality demographics. We computed the distance from at-risk women to physicians. Relative access scores were computed by a spatial model for each contiguous county. Access scores were compared across urban or rural status and racial and ethnic groups.

RESULTS

Between 2001 and 2020, the gynecologic oncologist workforce increased. By 2020, there were 1,178 active physicians and 98.3% practiced in urban areas (37.3% of all counties). Geographic disparities were identified, with 1.09 physicians per 100,000 women in urban areas compared with 0.1 physicians per 100,000 women in rural areas. In total, 2,862 counties (57.4 million at-risk women) lacked an active physician. Additionally, there was no increase in rural physicians, with only 1.7% practicing in rural areas in 2016-2020 relative to 2.2% in 2001-2005 ( P =.35). Women in racial and ethnic minority populations, such as American Indian or Alaska Native and Hispanic women, exhibited the lowest level of access to physicians across all time periods. For example, 23.7% of American Indian or Alaska Native women did not have access to a physician within 100 miles between 2016 and 2020, which did not improve over time. Non-Hispanic Black women experienced an increase in relative accessibility, with a 26.2% increase by 2016-2020. However, Asian or Pacific Islander women exhibited significantly better access than non-Hispanic White, non-Hispanic Black, Hispanic, and American Indian or Alaska Native women across all time periods.

CONCLUSION

Although the U.S. gynecologic oncologist workforce increased steadily over 20 years, this has not translated into evidence of improved access for many women from rural and underrepresented areas. However, health care utilization and cancer outcomes may not be influenced only by distance and availability. Policies and pipeline programs are needed to address these inequities in gynecologic cancer care.