Examining the role of access to care: Racial/ethnic differences in receipt of resection for early-stage non-small cell lung cancer among integrated system members and non-members

Trends and Disparities in Curative-Intent Treatment for Early-Stage Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: A Population-Based Analysis of Surgery and SBRT

BACKGROUND

Despite the increasing adoption of stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) as a recommended alternative for early-stage non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), population-based research on racial/ethnic disparities in curative-intent treatment accounting for SBRT remains limited. This study investigated trends and disparities in receiving curative-intent surgery and/or SBRT in a diverse, retrospective cohort.

METHODS

Early-stage NSCLC cases (2005-2017) from the Florida cancer registry were linked to individual-level statewide discharge data containing comorbidities and specific treatment information. Joinpoint regression assessed trends in treatment receipt. Multivariable logistic regression examined associations between race/ethnicity and treatment type.

RESULTS

Among 64,999 patients with early-stage NSCLC, 71.6% received curative-intent treatment (surgery and/or SBRT): 73.1%, 72.4%, and 60.3% among Hispanic, White, and Black patients, respectively (P < 0.01). SBRT use increased steeply from 2005 to 2007 and then by 7.9% annually from 2007 to 2017 (P < 0.01); curative-intent surgery remained stable from 2005 to 2014 before declining by 6.2% annually during 2014-2017 (P = 0.04). The Black-White disparity in receipt of curative-intent treatment was significant [ORadj, 0.65; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.60-0.71]. Patients with Charlson comorbidity index (CCI)≥3 had 36% (ORadj, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.60-0.69) lower odds of receiving curative-intent surgery and no significant difference for SBRT (ORadj, 1.06; 95% CI, 0.93-1.20) compared with CCI = 0.

CONCLUSIONS

Racial disparities in receiving curative-intent treatment for early-stage NSCLC persist despite the availability of SBRT, suggesting the full potential of curative-intent treatment for early-stage NSCLC remains unachieved.

IMPACT

Addressing disparities in early-stage NSCLC requires addressing differential treatment patterns and enhancing accessibility to treatments like underutilized SBRT, particularly for high-comorbidity populations such as Black patients.

What health inequalities exist in access to, outcomes from and experience of treatment for lung cancer? A scoping review

OBJECTIVES

Lung cancer (LC) continues to be the leading cause of cancer-related deaths and while there have been significant improvements in overall survival, this gain is not equally distributed. To address health inequalities (HIs), it is vital to identify whether and where they exist. This paper reviews existing literature on what HIs impact LC care and where these manifest on the care pathway.

DESIGN

A systematic scoping review based on Arksey and O'Malley's five-stage framework.

DATA SOURCES

Multiple databases (EMBASE, HMIC, Medline, PsycINFO, PubMed) were used to retrieve articles.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

Search limits were set to retrieve articles published between January 2012 and April 2022. Papers examining LC along with domains of HI were included. Two authors screened papers and independently assessed full texts.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

HIs were categorised according to: (a) HI domains: Protected Characteristics (PC); Socioeconomic and Deprivation Factors (SDF); Geographical Region (GR); Vulnerable or Socially Excluded Groups (VSG); and (b) where on the LC pathway (access to, outcomes from, experience of care) inequalities manifest. Data were extracted by two authors and collated in a spreadsheet for structured analysis and interpretation.

RESULTS

41 papers were included. The most studied domain was PC (32/41), followed by SDF (19/41), GR (18/41) and VSG (13/41). Most studies investigated differences in access (31/41) or outcomes (27/41), with few (4/41) exploring experience inequalities. Evidence showed race, rural residence and being part of a VSG impacted the access to LC diagnosis, treatment and supportive care. Additionally, rural residence, older age or male sex negatively impacted survival and mortality. The relationship between outcomes and other factors (eg, race, deprivation) showed mixed results.

CONCLUSIONS

Findings offer an opportunity to reflect on the understanding of HIs in LC care and provide a platform to consider targeted efforts to improve equity of access, outcomes and experience for patients.

Rural-Urban Disparities in Receipt of Surgery for Potentially Resectable Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer

INTRODUCTION

Access to cancer care, especially surgery, is limited in rural areas. However, the specific reasons rural patient populations do not receive surgery for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is unknown. We investigated geographic disparities in reasons for failure to receive guideline-indicated surgical treatment for patients with potentially resectable NSCLC.

METHODS

The National Cancer Database was used to identify patients with clinical stage I-IIIA (N0-N1) NSCLC between 2004 and 2018. Patients from rural areas were compared to urban areas, and the reason for nonreceipt of surgery was evaluated. Adjusted odds of (1) primary nonsurgical management, (2) surgery being deemed contraindicated due to risk, (3) surgery being recommended but not performed, and (4) overall failure to receive surgery were determined.

RESULTS

The study included 324,785 patients with NSCLC with 42,361 (13.0%) from rural areas. Overall, 62.4% of patients from urban areas and 58.8% of patients from rural areas underwent surgery (P < 0.001). Patients from rural areas had increased odds of (1) being recommended primary nonsurgical management (adjusted odds ratio [aOR]: 1.14, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.05-1.23), (2) surgery being deemed contraindicated due to risk (aOR: 1.19, 95% CI: 1.07-1.33), (3) surgery being recommended but not performed (aOR: 1.13, 95% CI: 1.01-1.26), and (4) overall failure to receive surgery (aOR: 1.21, 95% CI: 1.13-1.29; all P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

There are geographic disparities in the management of NSCLC. Rural patient populations are more likely to fail to undergo surgery for potentially resectable disease for every reason examined.

Facility-level national trends in racial disparities of surgical therapy for early-stage lung cancer

OBJECTIVE

The racial gap in surgical treatment for early-stage non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) has been narrowing at the population level, but it is unknown if this trend persists at the facility level.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We queried the National Cancer Database Participant User File from 2006 to 2016 for patients with stage I NSCLC. Facilities were grouped by type, location, and resection volume. The cumulative surgery rate for Black and White patients in each group was calculated, and an incidence rate difference of receipt of surgery was determined. Logistic regression with estimation of marginal effects was used to assess the probability difference of receiving surgery in Black versus White patients in each year.

RESULTS

In total, 315,474 patients were included; 287,585 (91.2%) were White and 27,889 (8.8%) were Black. The surgery rate was greater for White patients (60.2% vs 55.8%, P < .001). For most groups, the surgery disparity narrowed over the study period. The disparity widened in community cancer programs; facilities in the New England, West North Central, and Pacific regions; and the lowest volume facilities. The probability difference for receiving surgery was significantly smaller in 2016 versus 2006 in the Middle Atlantic region and community cancer programs; the difference was unchanged for all other groupings.

CONCLUSIONS

Trends in disparities in the use of resection for early-stage NSCLC are not universal across facility groupings. As efforts are made toward addressing racial disparities in surgical care for NSCLC, it will be important to remember that population-level analyses may mask lack of progress in certain facility groups.

Cancer statistics for African American/Black People 2022

African American/Black individuals have a disproportionate cancer burden, including the highest mortality and the lowest survival of any racial/ethnic group for most cancers. Every 3 years, the American Cancer Society estimates the number of new cancer cases and deaths for Black people in the United States and compiles the most recent data on cancer incidence (herein through 2018), mortality (through 2019), survival, screening, and risk factors using population-based data from the National Cancer Institute and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. In 2022, there will be approximately 224,080 new cancer cases and 73,680 cancer deaths among Black people in the United States. During the most recent 5-year period, Black men had a 6% higher incidence rate but 19% higher mortality than White men overall, including an approximately 2-fold higher risk of death from myeloma, stomach cancer, and prostate cancer. The overall cancer mortality disparity is narrowing between Black and White men because of a steeper drop in Black men for lung and prostate cancers. However, the decline in prostate cancer mortality in Black men slowed from 5% annually during 2010 through 2014 to 1.3% during 2015 through 2019, likely reflecting the 5% annual increase in advanced-stage diagnoses since 2012. Black women have an 8% lower incidence rate than White women but a 12% higher mortality; further, mortality rates are 2-fold higher for endometrial cancer and 41% higher for breast cancer despite similar or lower incidence rates. The wide breast cancer disparity reflects both later stage diagnosis (57% localized stage vs 67% in White women) and lower 5-year survival overall (82% vs 92%, respectively) and for every stage of disease (eg, 20% vs 30%, respectively, for distant stage). Breast cancer surpassed lung cancer as the leading cause of cancer death among Black women in 2019. Targeted interventions are needed to reduce stark cancer inequalities in the Black community.

Disparities in Lung Cancer Treatment

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Despite an overall reduction in lung cancer incidence and mortality rates worldwide, Blacks still have higher mortality rates compared to Whites. There are many factors that contribute to this difference. This review seeks to highlight racial disparities in treatment and the possible reasons for these disparities.

RECENT FINDINGS

Factors attributing to racial disparities in lung cancer treatment include social determinants of health, differences in the administration of guideline-concordant therapy as well as molecular testing that is essential for most NSCLC patients. One way to circumvent disparities in lung cancer survivorship is to ensure equal representation of race in research at all levels that will provide insight on interventions that will address social determinants of health, differences in treatment patterns, molecular testing, and clinical trial involvement.

Survival of Black and White Patients With Stage IV Small Cell Lung Cancer

Background

Small cell lung cancer (SCLC) is associated with aggressive biology and limited treatment options, making this disease a historical challenge. The influence of race and socioeconomic status on the survival of stage IV SCLC remains mostly unknown. Our study is designed to investigate the clinical survival outcomes in Black and White patients with stage IV SCLC and study the demographic, socioeconomic, clinical features, and treatment patterns of the disease and their impact on survival in Blacks and Whites.

Methods and Results

Stage IV SCLC cases from the National Cancer Database (NCDB) diagnosed between 2004 and 2014 were obtained. The follow-up endpoint is defined as death or the date of the last contact. Patients were divided into two groups by white and black. Features including demographic, socioeconomic, clinical, treatments and survival outcomes in Blacks and Whites were collected. Mortality hazard ratios of Blacks and Whites stage IV SCLC patients were analyzed. Survival of stage IV SCLC Black and White patients was also analyzed. Adjusted hazard ratios were analyzed by Cox proportional hazards regression models. Patients’ median follow-up time was 8.18 (2.37-15.84) months. Overall survival at 6, 12, 18 and 24 months were 52.4%, 25.7%, 13.2% and 7.9% in Blacks in compared to 51.0%, 23.6%, 11.5% and 6.9% in Whites. White patients had significantly higher socioeconomic status than Black patients. By contrast, Blacks were found associated with younger age at diagnosis, a significantly higher chance of receiving radiation therapy and treatments at an academic/research program. Compared to Whites, Blacks had a 9% decreased risk of death.

Conclusion

Our study demonstrated that Blacks have significant socioeconomic disadvantages compared to Whites. However, despite these unfavorable factors, survival for Blacks was significantly improved compared to Whites after covariable adjustment. This may be due to Blacks with Stage IV SCLC having a higher chance of receiving radiation therapy and treatments at an academic/research program. Identifying and removing the barriers to obtaining treatments at academic/research programs or improving the management in non-academic centers could improve the overall survival of stage IV SCLC.

Social Disparities in Lung Cancer

Social disparities in lung cancer diagnosis, treatment, and survival have been studied using national databases, statewide registries, and institution-level data. Some disparities emerge consistently, such as lower adherence to treatment guidelines and worse survival by race and socioeconomic status, whereas other disparities are less well studied. A critical appraisal of current data is essential to increasing equity in lung cancer care.

Racial and Other Healthcare Disparities in Patients With Extensive-Stage SCLC

INTRODUCTION

Systemic treatment with chemotherapy is warranted for patients with extensive-stage SCLC (ES-SCLC). The objective of this study was to determine whether racial and other healthcare disparities exist in receipt of chemotherapy for ES-SCLC.

METHODS

Utilizing the National Cancer Database, 148,961 patients diagnosed to have stage IV SCLC from 2004 to 2016 were identified. Adjusted ORs with 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs) were computed for receipt of chemotherapy using multivariate logistic regression modeling. Cox regression modeling was used to perform overall survival analysis, and adjusted hazard ratios were calculated.

RESULTS

A total of 82,592 patients were included, among which chemotherapy was not administered to 6557 (7.9%). Higher education, recent year of diagnosis, and treatment at more than one facility were associated with increased odds of receiving chemotherapy. Factors associated with a decreased likelihood of receiving chemotherapy were increasing age, race, nonprivate insurance, and comorbidities. On multivariate analysis, black patients had lower odds of receiving chemotherapy compared with white patients (adjusted OR, 0.85; 95% CI: 0.77-0.93, p = 0.0004). Furthermore, black patients had better survival compared with white patients (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.91; 95% CI: 0.89-0.94, p = 0.91). The 1-year survival (median survival) for black and white patients was 31.7% (8.3 mo) and 28.6% (8 mo), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Black patients with ES-SCLC were less likely to receive chemotherapy, as were elderly, uninsured, and those with nonprivate insurance. Further studies are required to address underlying reasons for lack of chemotherapy receipt in black patients with ES-SCLC and guide appropriate interventions to mitigate disparities.

Population-Based Registry Linkages to Improve Validity of Electronic Health Record-Based Cancer Research

BACKGROUND

There is tremendous potential to leverage the value gained from integrating electronic health records (EHR) and population-based cancer registry data for research. Registries provide diagnosis details, tumor characteristics, and treatment summaries, while EHRs contain rich clinical detail. A carefully conducted cancer registry linkage may also be used to improve the internal and external validity of inferences made from EHR-based studies.

METHODS

We linked the EHRs of a large, multispecialty, mixed-payer health care system with the statewide cancer registry and assessed the validity of our linked population. For internal validity, we identify patients that might be "missed" in a linkage, threatening the internal validity of an EHR study population. For generalizability, we compared linked cases with all other cancer patients in the 22-county EHR catchment region.

RESULTS

From an EHR population of 4.5 million, we identified 306,554 patients with cancer, 26% of the catchment region patients with cancer; 22.7% of linked patients were diagnosed with cancer after they migrated away from our health care system highlighting an advantage of system-wide linkage. We observed demographic differences between EHR patients and non-EHR patients in the surrounding region and demonstrated use of selection probabilities with model-based standardization to improve generalizability.

CONCLUSIONS

Our experiences set the foundation to encourage and inform researchers interested in working with EHRs for cancer research as well as provide context for leveraging linkages to assess and improve validity and generalizability.

IMPACT

Researchers conducting linkages may benefit from considering one or more of these approaches to establish and evaluate the validity of their EHR-based populations.See all articles in this CEBP Focus section, "Modernizing Population Science."

Disparities in Receiving Guideline-Concordant Treatment for Lung Cancer in the United States

Rationale: The level of adherence to lung cancer treatment guidelines in the United States is unclear. In addition, it is unclear whether previously identified disparities by racial or ethnic group and by age persist across all clinical subgroups.Objectives: To assess the level of adherence to the minimal lung cancer treatment recommended by the National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines (guideline-concordant treatment) in the United States, and to assess the persistence of disparities by racial or ethnic group and by age across all clinical subgroups.Methods: We evaluated whether 441,812 lung cancer cases in the National Cancer Database diagnosed between 2010 and 2014 received guideline-concordant treatment. Logistic regression models were used to assess possible disparities in receiving guideline-concordant treatment by racial or ethnic group and by age across all clinical subgroups, and whether these persist after adjusting for patient, tumor, and health care provider characteristics.Results: Overall, 62.1% of subjects received guideline-concordant treatment (range across clinical subgroups = 50.4-76.3%). However, 21.6% received no treatment (range = 10.3-31.4%) and 16.3% received less intensive treatment than recommended (range = 6.4-21.6%). Among the most common less intensive treatments for all subgroups was "conventionally fractionated radiotherapy only" (range = 2.5-16.0%), as was "chemotherapy only" for nonmetastatic subgroups (range = 1.2-13.7%), and "conventionally fractionated radiotherapy and chemotherapy" for localized non-small-cell lung cancer (5.9%). Guideline-concordant treatment was less likely with increasing age, despite adjusting for relevant covariates (age ≥ 80 yr compared with <50 yr: adjusted odds ratio = 0.12, 95% confidence interval = 0.12-0.13). This disparity was present in all clinical subgroups. In addition, non-Hispanic black patients were less likely to receive guideline-concordant treatment than non-Hispanic white patients (adjusted odds ratio = 0.78, 95% confidence interval = 0.76-0.80). This disparity was present in all clinical subgroups, although statistically nonsignificant for extensive disease small-cell lung cancer.Conclusions: Between 2010 and 2014, many patients with lung cancer in the United States received no treatment or less intensive treatment than recommended. Particularly, elderly patients with lung cancer and non-Hispanic black patients are less likely to receive guideline-concordant treatment. Patterns of care among those receiving less intensive treatment than recommended suggest room for improved uptake of treatments such as stereotactic body radiation therapy for subjects with localized non-small-cell lung cancer.

Racial Differences in Treatment and Survival among Veterans and Non-Veterans with Stage I NSCLC: An Evaluation of Veterans Affairs and SEER-Medicare Populations

BACKGROUND

Surgery is the preferred treatment for stage I non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), with radiation reserved for those not receiving surgery. Previous studies have shown lower rates of surgery among Blacks with stage I NSCLC than among Whites.

METHODS

Black and White men ages ≥65 years with stage I NSCLC diagnosed between 2001 and 2009 were identified in the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER)-Medicare database and Veterans Affairs (VA) cancer registry. Logistic regression and Cox proportional hazards models were used to examine associations between race, treatment, and survival.

RESULTS

Among the patients in the VA (n = 7,895) and SEER (n = 8,744), the proportion of Blacks was 13% and 7%, respectively. Overall, 16.2% of SEER patients (15.4% of Whites, 26.0% of Blacks) and 24.5% of VA patients received no treatment (23.4% of Whites, 31.4% of Blacks). In both cohorts, Blacks were less likely to receive any treatment compared with Whites [ORadj = 0.57; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.47-0.69 for SEER-Medicare; ORadj = 0.68; 95% CI, 0.58-0.79 for VA]. Among treated patients, Blacks were less likely than Whites to receive surgery only (ORadj = 0.57; 95% CI, 0.47-0.70 for SEER-Medicare; ORadj = 0.73; 95% CI, 0.62-0.86 for VA), but more likely to receive chemotherapy only and radiation only. There were no racial differences in survival.

CONCLUSIONS

Among VA and SEER-Medicare patients, Blacks were less likely to get surgical treatment. Blacks and Whites had similar survival outcomes when accounting for treatment.

IMPACT

This supports the hypothesis that equal treatment correlates with equal outcomes and emphasizes the need to understand multilevel predictors of lung cancer treatment disparities.

Cancer statistics for African Americans, 2019

In the United States, African American/black individuals bear a disproportionate share of the cancer burden, having the highest death rate and the lowest survival rate of any racial or ethnic group for most cancers. To monitor progress in reducing these inequalities, every 3 years the American Cancer Society provides the estimated number of new cancer cases and deaths for blacks in the United States and the most recent data on cancer incidence, mortality, survival, screening, and risk factors using data from the National Cancer Institute, the North American Association of Central Cancer Registries, and the National Center for Health Statistics. In 2019, approximately 202,260 new cases of cancer and 73,030 cancer deaths are expected to occur among blacks in the United States. During 2006 through 2015, the overall cancer incidence rate decreased faster in black men than in white men (2.4% vs 1.7% per year), largely due to the more rapid decline in lung cancer. In contrast, the overall cancer incidence rate was stable in black women (compared with a slight increase in white women), reflecting increasing rates for cancers of the breast, uterine corpus, and pancreas juxtaposed with declining trends for cancers of the lung and colorectum. Overall cancer death rates declined faster in blacks than whites among both males (2.6% vs 1.6% per year) and females (1.5% vs 1.3% per year), largely driven by greater declines for cancers of the lung, colorectum, and prostate. Consequently, the excess risk of overall cancer death in blacks compared with whites dropped from 47% in 1990 to 19% in 2016 in men and from 19% in 1990 to 13% in 2016 in women. Moreover, the black-white cancer disparity has been nearly eliminated in men <50 years and women ≥70 years. Twenty-five years of continuous declines in the cancer death rate among black individuals translates to more than 462,000 fewer cancer deaths. Continued progress in reducing disparities will require expanding access to high-quality prevention, early detection, and treatment for all Americans.