Investigating Black-White disparities in gynecologic oncology: Theories, conceptual models, and applications

Five-Year Relative Survival Rates of Women Diagnosed with Uterine Cancer by County-Level Socioeconomic Status Overall and across Histology and Race/Ethnicity

Understanding socioeconomic factors contributing to uterine cancer survival disparities is crucial, especially given the increasing incidence of uterine cancer, which disproportionately impacts racial/ethnic groups. We investigated the impact of county-level socioeconomic factors on five-year survival rates of uterine cancer overall and by histology across race/ethnicity. We included 333,013 women aged ≥ 30 years with microscopically confirmed uterine cancers (2000-2018) from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results 22 database followed through 2019. Age-standardized five-year relative survival rates were compared within race/ethnicity and histology, examining the differences across tertiles of county-level percent (%) Collapse

Key Words

• five-year survival
• histologic subtype
• race/ethnic disparity
• race/ethnicity
• socioeconomic status
• uterine cancer

Collapse

MESH Headings Collapse

Grants Collapse

Affiliation(s)

Akemi T. Wijayabahu Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, Rockville, MD 20850, USA; (J.K.M.-A.); (M.S.S.); (M.A.C.)
Jennifer K. McGee-Avila Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, Rockville, MD 20850, USA; (J.K.M.-A.); (M.S.S.); (M.A.C.)
Meredith S. Shiels Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, Rockville, MD 20850, USA; (J.K.M.-A.); (M.S.S.); (M.A.C.)
Alfonsus Adrian H. Harsono Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL 35233, USA; (A.A.H.H.); (R.C.A.)
Rebecca C. Arend Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL 35233, USA; (A.A.H.H.); (R.C.A.)
Megan A. Clarke Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, Rockville, MD 20850, USA; (J.K.M.-A.); (M.S.S.); (M.A.C.)

Collapse

Risk Factors for Incident Polycystic Ovary Syndrome Diagnosis

Objective: While highly prevalent, risk factors for incident polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) are poorly delineated. Using a population-based cohort, we sought to identify predictors of incident PCOS diagnosis. Materials and Methods: A matched case-control analysis was completed utilizing patients enrolled in Kaiser Permanente Washington from 2006 to 2019. Inclusion criteria included female sex, age 16-40 years, and ≥3 years of prior enrollment with ≥1 health care encounter. PCOS cases were identified using International Classification of Diseases codes. For each incident case (n = 2,491), 5 patients without PCOS (n = 12,455) were matched based on birth year and enrollment status. Potential risk factors preceding diagnosis included family history of PCOS, premature menarche, parity, race, weight gain, obesity, valproate use, metabolic syndrome, epilepsy, prediabetes, and types 1 and 2 diabetes. Potential risk factors for incident PCOS diagnosis were assessed with univariate and multivariable conditional logistic regressions. Results: Mean age of PCOS cases was 26.9 years (SD 6.8). PCOS cases, compared with non-PCOS, were more frequently nulliparous (70.9% versus 62.4%) and in the 3 years prior to index date were more likely to have obesity (53.8% versus 20.7%), metabolic syndrome (14.5% versus 4.3%), prediabetes (7.4% versus 1.6%), and type 2 diabetes (4.1% versus 1.7%) (p < 0.001 for all comparisons). In multivariable models, factors associated with higher risk for incident PCOS included the following: obesity (compared with nonobese) Class I-II (body-mass index [BMI], 30-40 kg/m2; odds ratio [OR], 3.8; 95% confidence interval [CI], 3.4-4.2), Class III (BMI > 40 kg/m2; OR, 7.5, 95% CI, 6.5-8.7), weight gain (compared with weight loss or maintenance) of 1-10% (OR, 1.7, 95% CI, 1.3-2.1), 10-20% (OR, 1.9; 95% CI, 1.5-2.4), and >20% (OR, 2.6; 95% CI, 1.9-3.6), prediabetes (OR, 2.7; 95% CI, 2.1-3.4), and metabolic syndrome (OR, 1.8: 95% CI, 1.5-2.1). Conclusion: Excess weight gain, obesity, and metabolic dysfunction may play a key role in the ensuing phenotypic expression of PCOS. Treatment and prevention strategies targeted at preventing weight gain in early reproductive years may help reduce the risk of this syndrome.

Differential utilization of the online patient portal for completion of health-related social needs screening during routine gynecologic cancer care

BACKGROUND

Telehealth technologies offer efficient ways to deliver health-related social needs (HRSN) screening in cancer care, but these methods may not reach all populations. The authors examined patient characteristics associated with using an online patient portal (OPP) to complete HRSN screening as part of gynecologic cancer care.

METHODS

From June 2021 to June 2023, patients in a gynecologic oncology clinic completed validated HRSN screening questions either (1) using the OPP (independently before the visit) or (2) in person (verbally administered by clinic staff). The authors examined the prevalence of HRSN according to activated OPP status and, in a restricted subgroup, used stepwise multivariate Poisson regression to identify associations between patient and visit characteristics and using the OPP.

RESULTS

Of 1616 patients, 87.4% (n = 1413) had an activated OPP. Patients with inactive OPPs (vs. activated OPPs) more frequently reported two or more needs (10% vs 5%; p < .01). Of 986 patients in the restricted cohort, 52% used the OPP to complete screening. The final multivariable model indicated that patients were less likely to use the OPP if they were Black (vs. White; adjusted relative risk [aRR], 0.70; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.59-0.83); not employed (vs. employed; aRR, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.68-0.97), or had low measures of OPP engagement (aRR, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.68-0.92). New versus established patients were 21% more likely to use the OPP (aRR, 1.21; 95% CI, 1.06-1.38).

CONCLUSIONS

Differential use of the OPP suggested that over-reliance on digital technologies could limit the ability to reach those populations that have social factors already associated with cancer outcome disparities. Cancer centers should consider using multiple delivery methods for HRSN screening to maximize reach to all populations.

The impact of devaluing Women of Color: stress, reproduction, and justice

This commentary is in response to the Call for Papers put forth by the Critical Midwifery Studies Collective (June 2022). We argue that due to a long and ongoing history of gendered racism, Women of Color are devalued in U.S. society. Devaluing Women of Color leads maternal healthcare practitioners to miss and even dismiss distress in Women of Color. The result is systematic underdiagnosis, undertreatment, and the delivery of poorer care to Women of Color, which negatively affects reproductive outcomes generally and birth outcomes specifically. These compounding effects exacerbate distress in Women of Color leading to greater distress. Stress physiology is ancient and intricately interwoven with healthy pregnancy physiology, and this relationship is a highly conserved reproductive strategy. Thus, where there is disproportionate or excess stress (distress), unsurprisingly, there are disproportionate and excess rates of poorer reproductive outcomes. Stress physiology and reproductive physiology collide with social injustices (i.e., racism, discrimination, and anti-Blackness), resulting in pernicious racialized maternal health disparities. Accordingly, the interplay between stress and reproduction is a key social justice issue and an important site for theoretical inquiry and birth equity efforts. Fortunately, both stress physiology and pregnancy physiology are highly plastic-responsive to the benefits of increased social support and respectful maternity care. Justice means valuing Women of Color and valuing their right to have a healthy, respected, and safe life.

Racial, ethnic and country of origin disparities in aggressive endometrial cancer histologic subtypes

OBJECTIVE

This study investigated the risk of an aggressive endometrial cancer (EC) diagnosis by race, ethnicity, and country of origin to further elucidate histologic disparities in non-Hispanic Black (NHB), Hispanic, Asian/Pacific Islander (API), American Indian/Alaskan Native (AIAN) vs. non-Hispanic White (NHW) patients, particularly in Hispanic or API subgroups.

METHODS

Patient diagnosed between 2004 and 2020 with low grade (LG)-endometrioid endometrial cancer (ECC) or an aggressive EC including grade 3 EEC, serous carcinoma, clear cell carcinoma, mixed epithelial carcinoma, or carcinosarcoma in the National Cancer Database were studied. The odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) for diagnosis of an aggressive EC histology was estimated using logistic modeling.

RESULTS

There were 343,868 NHW, 48,897 NHB, 30,013 Hispanic, 15,015 API and 1646 AIAN patients. The OR (95% CI) for an aggressive EC diagnosis was 3.07 (3.01-3.13) for NHB, 1.08 (1.06-1.11) for Hispanic, 1.17 (1.13-1.21) for API and 1.07 (0.96-1.19) for AIAN, relative to NHW patients. Subset analyses by country of origin illustrated the diversity in the OR for an aggressive EC diagnosis among Hispanic (1.18 for Mexican to 1.87 for Dominican), Asian (1.14 Asian Indian-Pakistani to 1.48 Korean) and Pacific Islander (1.00 for Hawaiian to 1.33 for Samoan) descendants. Hispanic, API and AIAN patients were diagnosed 5-years younger that NHW patients, and the risk for an aggressive EC histology were all significantly higher than NHW patients after correcting for age. Insurance status was another independent risk factor for aggressive histology.

CONCLUSIONS

Risk of an aggressive EC diagnosis varied by race, ethnicity, and country of origin. NHB patients had the highest risk, followed by Dominican, South/Central American, Cuban, Korean, Thai, Vietnamese, and Filipino descendants.

Racial disparities in endometrial cancer: Where are we after 26 years?

INTRODUCTION

Endometrial cancer is the most commonly diagnosed female genital tract malignancy in the United States of America. Racial disparities surrounding this particular disease have been extensively investigated for over 26-years. We sought to determine if research in this area has led to any significant improvements in this disparity.

METHODS

We performed a rapid systematic review of English language publications on racial disparities in endometrial cancer among African American (AAW) and white American women (WAW), from 1997 to 2023. We looked at trends in incidence and survival; impact of known poor prognostic factors (stage at diagnosis, histological subtypes, grade); co-morbidities; differences in treatment (surgery, radiation and chemotherapy); socioeconomic factors; differences in biological and genetic markers; and policies/declarations.

RESULTS

During the period under review (1997-2023), there was a notable increase in both disease incidence (39%) and mortality (26%) rates for AAW, in comparison to WAW among whom the incidence rates increased by 2% and mortality rates rose, but 9% less than for AAW. It should be noted that the current incidence rate of 29.4% in AAW represent a reversal of what is was 26-years ago, when the incidence rate was 17.8%. In comparison to WAW, AAW had a higher prevalence of poor prognostic variables, more co-morbidities, lower income levels, less insurance coverage, and were more frequently under treated with surgery, chemotherapy and radiation. To date no actionable molecular/genetic markers have been identified. We were unable to locate any published recommendations or active programs of implementation strategies/policies designed to effectively mitigate the documented racial disparity.

CONCLUSION

Racial disparities in disease incidence and mortality in endometrial cancer rates between WAW and AAW have widened during a 26-year period of robust research, suggesting that current research alone is not enough to eliminate this disparity. Based on this rapid systematic review we have identified and analyzed the impact of causation variables on this disparity. Additionally, we have made strong and pertinent recommendations for the benefit of mitigating this escalating racial disparity.

Underrepresentation of racial and ethnic minority groups in gynecologic oncology: An analysis of over 250 trials

OBJECTIVE

To describe the participation of racial and ethnic minority groups (REMGs) in gynecologic oncology trials.

METHODS

Gynecologic oncology studies registered on ClinicalTrials.gov between 2007 and 2020 were identified. Trials with published results were analyzed based on reporting of race/ethnicity in relation to disease site and trial characteristics. Expected enrollment by race/ethnicity was calculated and compared to actual enrollment, adjusted for 2010 US Census population data.

RESULTS

2146 gynecologic oncology trials were identified. Of published trials (n = 252), 99 (39.3%) reported race/ethnicity data. Recent trials were more likely to report these data (36% from 2007 to 2009; 51% 2013-2015; and 53% from 2016 to 2018, p = 0.01). Of all trials, ovarian cancer trials were least likely to report race/ethnicity data (32.1% vs 39.3%, p = 0.011). Population-adjusted under-enrollment for Blacks was 7-fold in ovarian cancer, Latinx 10-fold for ovarian and 6-fold in uterine cancer trials, Asians 2.5-fold in uterine cancer trials, and American Indian and Alaska Native individuals 6-fold in ovarian trials. Trials for most disease sites have enrolled more REMGs in recent years - REMGs made up 19.6% of trial participants in 2007-2009 compared to 38.1% in 2016-2018 (p < 0.0001).

CONCLUSION

Less than half of trials that published results reported race/ethnicity data. Available data reveals that enrollment of REMGs is significantly below expected rates based on national census data. These disparities persisted even after additionally adjusting for population size. Despite improvement in recent years, additional recruitment of REMGs is needed to achieve more representative and equitable participation in gynecologic cancer clinical trials.

A review of racial disparities in ovarian cancer and clinical trials

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Ovarian cancer ranks fifth in mortality among women with cancer and accounts for more death compared to any other gynecological cancers. This review summarizes the most recent literature on disparities in ovarian cancer as well as within recent clinical trials.

RECENT FINDINGS

Recent studies have identified a notable disparity in genetic testing utilization, disease stage at the time of diagnosis, and adherence to treatment guidelines between Black women and their White counterparts, ultimately leading to increased mortality rates among Black women from ovarian cancer. Additionally, there is an underreporting of race in clinical trials and those that do report race demonstrate significant racial disparities within trial participants with the majority of participants being White.

SUMMARY

It is imperative that we address the significant racial disparities within ovarian cancer and clinical trials to establish a framework of equitable healthcare provision. Multiple determinants, such as implicit bias, provider mistrust, accessibility hurdles, and socioeconomic influences, appear to contribute to the current disparities faced by women of color. Further investigation is warranted, encompassing a deeper understanding of diverse patient perspectives and identifying barriers to receiving optimal care and participating in clinical trials.

Demographic reporting and language exclusion in gynecologic oncology clinical trials

BACKGROUND

Participation in clinical trials may help mitigate disparate cancer outcomes. Thus, ensuring equitable access to clinical trials is a major priority for national cancer organizations.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to examine clinical trial eligibility criteria that may adversely affect the enrollment of underrepresented groups and assess the availability of demographic information in published gynecologic oncology studies.

STUDY DESIGN

ClinicalTrials.gov was searched for gynecologic oncology studies conducted between 1997 and 2021. Each study's inclusion and exclusion criteria were reviewed to determine whether demographic factors were used for enrollment screening. For published studies, demographic variables that were reported were identified. The expected clinical trial enrollment based on disease incidence and mortality was compared with the observed trial enrollment based on race.

RESULTS

There were 1597 gynecologic oncology studies: 883 (55%) from ovarian cancer studies, 336 (21%) from cervical cancer studies, 262 (17%) from uterine cancer studies, and 116 (7%) from multisite gynecologic oncology studies. Of the 581 published studies, 554 (95%) reported age, 363 (63%) reported race, and 171 (29%) reported ethnicities. Cervical cancer studies were most likely to report demographic information, including race (P=.026) and ethnicity (P<.001). During the study period, 189 studies (12%) excluded patients based on the language spoken. Industry-sponsored trials (odds ratio, 0.07; 95% confidence interval, 0.02-0.30) and organization-sponsored trials (odds ratio, 0.40; 95% confidence interval, 0.22-0.73) were less likely to exclude patients because of language than investigator-initiated trials. A minority of patients (37%) in cervical cancer trials were of White race, compared with 85% of patients in uterine cancer trials and 82% of patients in ovarian cancer trials.

CONCLUSION

Over the last 3 decades, 1 in 10 gynecologic oncology trials excluded patients because of language. Race and ethnicity were reported in more than half of the available studies. Initiatives to increase transparency in recruiting underrepresented patients and reporting demographic data are urgently needed.

Adapting a model of cervical carcinogenesis to self-identified Black women to evaluate racial disparities in the United States

BACKGROUND

Self-identified Black women in the United States have higher cervical cancer incidence and mortality than the general population, but these differences have not been clearly attributed across described cancer care inequities.

METHODS

A previously established microsimulation model of cervical cancer was adapted to reflect demographic, screening, and survival data for Black US women and compared with a model reflecting data for all US women. Each model input with stratified data (all-cause mortality, hysterectomy rates, screening frequency, screening modality, follow-up, and cancer survival) was sequentially replaced with Black-race specific data to arrive at a fully specified model reflecting Black women. At each step, we estimated the relative contribution of inputs to observed disparities.

RESULTS

Estimated (hysterectomy-adjusted) cervical cancer incidence was 8.6 per 100 000 in the all-race model vs 10.8 per 100 000 in the Black-race model (relative risk [RR] = 1.24, range = 1.23-1.27). Estimated all-race cervical cancer mortality was 2.9 per 100 000 vs 5.5 per 100 000 in the Black-race model (RR = 1.92, range = 1.85-2.00). We found the largest contributors of incidence disparities were follow-up from positive screening results (47.3% of the total disparity) and screening frequency (32.7%). For mortality disparities, the largest contributor was cancer survival differences (70.1%) followed by screening follow-up (12.7%).

CONCLUSION

To reduce disparities in cervical cancer incidence and mortality, it is important to understand and address differences in care access and quality across the continuum of care. Focusing on the practices and policies that drive differences in treatment and follow-up from cervical abnormalities may have the highest impact.

An Intervention-Based Approach to Achieve Racial Equity in Gynecologic Oncology

Racial inequities within gynecologic oncology exist at every step of the cancer continuum. Although the disparities have been well described, there is a significant gap in the literature focused on eliminating inequities in gynecologic cancer outcomes. The goal of this narrative review is to highlight successful, evidence-based interventions from within and outside of gynecologic oncology that alleviate disparity, providing a call to action for further research and implementation efforts within the field. These solutions are organized in the socioecologic framework, where multiple levels of influence-societal, community, organizational, interpersonal, and individual-affect health outcomes.

Racial and Ethnic Disparities in Cervical Cancer Screening From Three U.S. Healthcare Settings

INTRODUCTION

This study sought to characterize racial and ethnic disparities in cervical cancer screening and follow-up of abnormal findings across 3 U.S. healthcare settings.

METHODS

Data were from 2016 to 2019 and were analyzed in 2022, reflecting sites within the Multi-level Optimization of the Cervical Cancer Screening Process in Diverse Settings & Populations Research Center, part of the Population-based Research to Optimize the Screening Process consortium, including a safety-net system in the southwestern U.S., a northwestern mixed-model system, and a northeastern integrated healthcare system. Screening uptake was evaluated among average-risk patients (i.e., no previous abnormalities) by race and ethnicity as captured in the electronic health record, using chi-square tests. Among patients with abnormal findings requiring follow-up, the proportion receiving colposcopy or biopsy within 6 months was reported. Multivariable regression was conducted to assess how clinical, socioeconomic, and structural characteristics mediate observed differences.

RESULTS

Among 188,415 eligible patients, 62.8% received cervical cancer screening during the 3-year study period. Screening use was lower among non-Hispanic Black patients (53.2%) and higher among Hispanic (65.4%,) and Asian/Pacific Islander (66.5%) than among non-Hispanic White patients (63.5%, all p<0.001). Most differences were explained by the distribution of patients across sites and differences in insurance. Hispanic patients remained more likely to screen after controlling for a variety of clinical and sociodemographic factors (risk ratio=1.14, CI=1.12, 1.16). Among those receiving any screening test, Black and Hispanic patients were more likely to receive Pap-only testing (versus receiving co-testing). Follow-up from abnormal results was low for all groups (72.5%) but highest among Hispanic participants (78.8%, p<0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

In a large cohort receiving care across 3 diverse healthcare settings, cervical cancer screening and follow-up were below 80% coverage targets. Lower screening for Black patients was attenuated by controlling for insurance and site of care, underscoring the role of systemic inequity. In addition, it is crucial to improve follow-up after abnormalities are identified, which was low for all populations.

Why Causation Matters: Rethinking "Race" as a Risk Factor

Although it is tempting to construe the correlation between Black "race" and higher rates of preterm birth as causal, this logic is flawed. Worse, the continued use of Black "race" as a risk factor for preterm birth is actively harmful. Using Black "race" as a risk factor suggests a causal relationship that does not exist and, critically, obscures what actually causes Black patients to be more vulnerable to poorer maternal and infant outcomes: anti-Black racism. Failing to name anti-Black racism as the root cause of Black patients' vulnerability conceals key pathways and tempts us to construe Black "race" as immutably related to higher rates of preterm birth. The result is that we overlook two highly treatable pathways-chronic stress and implicit bias-through which anti-Black racism negatively contributes to birth. Thus, clinicians may underuse important tools to reduce stress from racism and discrimination while missing opportunities to address implicit bias within their practices and institutions. Fortunately, researchers, physicians, clinicians, and medical staff can positively affect Black maternal and infant health by shifting our causal paradigm. By eliminating the use of Black "race" as a risk factor and naming anti-Black racism as the root cause of Black patients' vulnerability, we can practice anti-racist maternity care and take a critical step toward achieving birth equity.

A Rubric to Center Equity in Obstetrics and Gynecology Research

The Steering Committee for the Obstetrics & Gynecology special edition titled "Racism in Reproductive Health: Lighting a Path to Health Equity" formed a working group to create an equity rubric. The goal was to provide a tool to help researchers systematically center health equity as they conceptualize, design, analyze, interpret, and evaluate research in obstetrics and gynecology. This commentary reviews the rationale, iterative process, and literature guiding the creation of the equity rubric.

Incidence, prevalence, and trends in polycystic ovary syndrome diagnosis: a United States population-based study from 2006 to 2019

BACKGROUND

Polycystic ovary syndrome is the most common endocrine disorder in women of reproductive age, yet US incidence estimates do not exist, and prevalence estimates vary widely.

OBJECTIVE

A population-based US study estimated the incidence, prevalence, and trends of polycystic ovary syndrome by age, race and ethnicity, and diagnosing provider type.

STUDY DESIGN

A retrospective cohort study of patients enrolled in Kaiser Permanente Washington from 2006 to 2019 was conducted. All members identified as female, aged 16 to 40 years with at least 3 years of enrollment and at least 1 healthcare encounter during that time, were eligible for inclusion. Individuals were excluded if they had a history of oophorectomy or hysterectomy. Polycystic ovary syndrome cases were identified using the International Classification of Diseases diagnosis codes (International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, 256.4 or International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision, E28.2). Individuals with a polycystic ovary syndrome diagnosis before study entry were excluded from incidence rate estimations. The incidence rates were adjusted by age using direct standardization to the 2010 US census data. Temporal trends in incidence were assessed using weighted linear regression (overall) and Poisson regression (by age, race and ethnicity, and provider type). Prevalent cases were defined as patients with a polycystic ovary syndrome diagnosis at any time before the end of 2019. Medical record review of 700 incident cases diagnosed in 2011-2019 was performed to validate incident cases identified by International Classification of Diseases codes using the Rotterdam criteria.

RESULTS

Among 177,527 eligible patients who contributed 586,470 person-years, 2491 incident polycystic ovary syndrome cases were identified. The mean age at diagnosis was 26.9 years, and the mean body mass index was 31.6 kg/m2. Overall incidence was 42.5 per 10,000 person-years; the rates were similar over time but increased in individuals aged 16 to 20 years from 31.0 to 51.9 per 10,000 person-years (P=.01) and decreased among those aged 26 to 30 years from 82.8 to 45.0 per 10,000 person-years (P=.02). A small decreasing temporal trend in incidence rates was only observed among non-Hispanic White individuals (P=.01). The incidence rates by diagnosing provider type varied little over time. Among the 58,241 patients who contributed person-time in 2019, 3036 (5.2%) had a polycystic ovary syndrome International Classification of Diseases diagnosis code; the prevalence was the highest among the Hawaiian and Pacific Islander group (7.6%) followed by Native American and Hispanic groups. Medical record review classified 60% as definite or probable incident, 14% as possible incident, and 17% as prevalent polycystic ovary syndrome. The overall positive predictive value of polycystic ovary syndrome International Classification of Diseases diagnosis code for identifying definite, probable, or possible incident polycystic ovary syndrome was 76% (95% confidence interval, 72%-79%).

CONCLUSION

Among a cohort of nonselected females in the United States, we observed stable rates of incident polycystic ovary syndrome diagnoses over time. The incidence of polycystic ovary syndrome was 4- to 5-fold greater than reported for the United Kingdom. The prevalence of polycystic ovary syndrome (5.2%) was almost double before the published US estimates (2.9%) based on the International Classification of Diseases codes. Race and ethnicity and provider type did not seem to have a major impact on temporal rates. Incident diagnoses increased over time in younger and decreased in older age groups, perhaps related to shifting practice patterns with greater awareness among practitioners of the impact of polycystic ovary syndrome on long-term health outcomes and improved prevention efforts. Moreover, increasing obesity rates may be a factor driving the earlier ages at diagnosis.

Factors Associated With Survival Disparities Between Non-Hispanic Black and White Patients With Uterine Cancer

Importance

Disparities in survival exist between non-Hispanic Black (hereafter, Black) and non-Hispanic White (hereafter, White) patients with uterine cancer.

Objective

To investigate factors associated with racial disparities in survival between Black and White patients with uterine cancer.

Design, Setting, and Patients

This cohort study used data from the National Cancer Database on 274 838 Black and White patients who received a diagnosis of uterine cancer from January 1, 2004, to December 31, 2017, with follow-up through December 2020. Statistical analysis was performed in July 2022.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Overall survival by self-reported race and evaluation of explanatory study factors associated with hazard ratio (HR) reduction for Black vs White patients. A propensity scoring approach was applied sequentially to balance racial differences in demographic characteristics, comorbidity score, neighborhood income, insurance status, histologic subtype, disease stage, and treatment.

Results

The study included 32 230 Black female patients (mean [SD] age at diagnosis, 63.8 [10.0] years) and 242 608 White female patients (mean [SD] age at diagnosis, 63.5 [10.5] years) and had a median follow-up of 74.0 months (range, 43.5-113.8 months). Black patients were more likely than White patients to have low income (44.1% vs 14.0%), be uninsured (5.7% vs 2.6%), present with nonendometrioid histologic characteristics (46.1% vs 21.6%), have an advanced disease stage (34.1% vs 19.8%), receive first-line chemotherapy (33.8% vs 18.2%), and have worse 5-year survival (58.6% vs 78.5%). Among patients who received a diagnosis at younger than 65 years of age, the HR for death for Black vs White patients was 2.43 (95% CI, 2.34-2.52) in a baseline demographic-adjusted model and 1.29 (95% CI, 1.23-1.35) after balancing other factors. Comorbidity score, neighborhood income, insurance status, histologic subtype, disease stage, treatment, and unexplained factors accounted for 0.8%, 7.2%, 11.5%, 53.1%, 5.8%, 1.2%, and 20.4%, respectively, of the excess relative risk (ERR) among the younger Black vs White patients. Among patients 65 years or older, the HR for death for Black vs White patients was 1.87 (95% CI, 1.81-1.93) in the baseline model and 1.14 (95% CI, 1.09-1.19) after balancing other factors. Comorbidity score, neighborhood income, insurance status, histologic subtype, disease stage, treatment, and unexplained factors accounted for 3.0%, 7.5%, 0.0%, 56.2%, 10.6%, 6.9%, and 15.8%, respectively, of the ERR among Black vs White patients aged 65 years or older.

Conclusions and Relevance

This study suggests that histologic subtype was the dominant factor associated with racial survival disparity among patients with uterine cancer, while insurance status represented the main modifiable factor for women younger than 65 years. Additional studies of interactions between biology and social determinants of health are merited.

Health-care access dimensions and ovarian cancer survival: SEER-Medicare analysis of the ORCHiD study

BACKGROUND

Racial and ethnic disparities in ovarian cancer (OC) survival are well-documented. However, few studies have investigated how health-care access (HCA) contributes to these disparities.

METHODS

To evaluate the influence of HCA on OC mortality, we analyzed 2008-2015 Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results-Medicare data. Multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression models were used to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for the association between HCA dimensions (affordability, availability, accessibility) and OC-specific and all-cause mortality, adjusting for patient characteristics and treatment receipt.

RESULTS

The study cohort included 7590 OC patients: 454 (6.0%) Hispanic, 501 (6.6%) Non-Hispanic (NH) Black, and 6635 (87.4%) NH White. Higher affordability (HR = 0.90, 95% CI = 0.87 to 0.94), availability (HR = 0.95, 95% CI = 0.92 to 0.99), and accessibility scores (HR = 0.93, 95% CI = 0.87 to 0.99) were associated with lower risk of OC mortality after adjusting for demographic and clinical factors. Racial disparities were observed after additional adjustment for these HCA dimensions: NH Black patients experienced a 26% higher risk of OC mortality compared with NH White patients (HR = 1.26, 95% CI = 1.11 to 1.43) and a 45% higher risk among patients who survived at least 12 months (HR = 1.45, 95% CI = 1.16 to 1.81).

CONCLUSIONS

HCA dimensions are statistically significantly associated with mortality after OC and explain some, but not all, of the observed racial disparity in survival of patients with OC. Although equalizing access to quality health care remains critical, research on other HCA dimensions is needed to determine additional factors contributing to disparate OC outcomes by race and ethnicity and advance the field toward health equity.

Enrollment of Racial and Ethnic Minoritized Groups in Gynecologic Oncology Clinical Trials: A Review of the Scope of the Problem, Contributing Factors, and Strategies to Improve Inclusion

Racial inequities are well-documented across the gynecologic oncology care continuum, including the representation of racial and ethnic minoritized groups (REMGs) in gynecologic oncology clinical trials. We specifically reviewed the scope of REMG disparities, contributing factors, and strategies to improve inclusion. We found systematic and progressively worsening under-enrollment of REMGs, particularly of Black and Latinx populations. In addition, race/ethnicity data reporting is poor, yet a prerequisite for accountability to recruitment goals. Trial participation barriers are multifactorial, and successful remediation likely requires multi-level strategies. More rigorous, transparent data on trial participants and effectiveness studies on REMG recruitment strategies are needed to improve enrollment.

Racial and Ethnic Disparities in Cervical Cancer Incidence, Survival, and Mortality by Histologic Subtype

PURPOSE

We conducted an integrated population-based analysis of histologic subtype-specific cervical cancer incidence, survival, and incidence-based mortality by race and ethnicity, with correction for hysterectomy prevalence.

METHODS

Using the SEER 21 and 18 registries, we selected primary cases of malignant cervical cancer diagnosed among women ≥ 15 years. We evaluated age-adjusted incidence rates among cases diagnosed between 2000 and 2018 (SEER21) and incidence-based mortality rates among deaths from 2005 to 2018 (SEER18), per 100,000 person-years. Rates were stratified by histologic subtype and race/ethnicity (incidence and mortality), and stage, age at diagnosis, and county-level measures of social determinants of health (incidence only). Incidence and mortality rates were corrected for hysterectomy using data from the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System. We estimated 5-year relative survival by histologic subtype and stratified by stage at diagnosis.

RESULTS

Incidence rates of cervical squamous cell carcinoma were highest in Black and Hispanic women, while incidence rates of cervical adenocarcinoma (ADC) were highest among Hispanic and White women, particularly for localized ADC. County-level income and education variables were inversely associated with squamous cell carcinoma incidence rates in all racial and ethnic groups but had less influence on ADC incidence rates. Black women had the highest overall mortality rates and lowest 5-year relative survival, irrespective of subtype and stage. Disparities in survival were particularly pronounced for Black women with regional and distant ADC, compared with other racial/ethnic groups.

CONCLUSION

Although Black women are less likely to be diagnosed with ADC compared with all other racial/ethnic groups, they experience the highest mortality rates for this subtype, likely attributed to the poor survival observed for Black women with regional and distant ADC.

Improving cervical cancer survival-A multifaceted strategy to sustain progress for this global problem

Cervical cancer is associated with profound socioeconomic and racial disparities in incidence, mortality, morbidity, and years of life lost. The last standard-of-care treatment innovation for locally advanced cervical cancer occurred in 1999, when cisplatin chemotherapy was added to pelvic radiation therapy (chemoradiation therapy). Chemoradiation therapy is associated with a 30%-50% failure rate, and there is currently no cure for recurrent or metastatic disease. The enormity of the worldwide clinical problem of cervical cancer morbidity and mortality as well as the egregiously unchanged mortality rate over the last several decades are recognized by the National Institutes of Health as urgent priorities. This is reflected within the Office of Research on Women's Health effort to advance National Institutes of Health research on the health of women, as highlighted in a recent symposium. In the current review, the authors address the state of the science and opportunities to improve cervical cancer survival with an emphasis on improving access, using technology in innovative and widely implementable ways, and improving current understanding of cervical cancer biology. LAY SUMMARY: Cervical cancer is associated with profound socioeconomic and racial disparities in incidence, mortality, morbidity, and years of life lost. In this review, the state of the science and opportunities to improve cervical cancer survival are presented with an emphasis on improving access, using technology in innovative and widely implementable ways, and improving current understanding of cervical cancer biology.

Association between time to diagnosis, time to treatment, and ovarian cancer survival in the United States

OBJECTIVE

Evaluate the association between time to diagnosis and treatment of advanced ovarian cancer with overall and ovarian cancer specific mortality using a retrospective cross sectional study of a population based cancer registry database.

METHODS

The Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results-Medicare database was searched from 1992 to 2015 for women aged ≥66 years with epithelial ovarian cancer and abdominal/pelvic pain, bloating, difficulty eating, or urinary symptoms within 1 year of cancer diagnosis. Time from presentation to diagnosis and treatment were evaluated as outcomes and covariables. Cox regression models and adjusted Kaplan-Meier curves evaluated 5 year overall and cancer-specific survival.

RESULTS

Among 13 872 women, better survival was associated with longer time from presentation to diagnosis (overall survival hazard ratio (HR) 0.95, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.94 to 0.95; cancer specific survival HR 0.95, 95% CI 0.94 to 0.96) and diagnosis to treatment (overall survival HR 0.94, 95% CI 0.92 to 0.96; cancer specific survival HR 0.93, 95% CI 0.91 to 0.96). There was longer time from presentation to diagnosis in Hispanic women (relative risk (RR) 1.21, 95% CI 1.12 to 1.32) and from diagnosis to treatment in non-Hispanic black women (RR 1.36, 95% CI 1.21 to 1.54), with lower likelihood of survival at 5 years after adjustment for time to diagnosis and treatment among non-Hispanic black women (HR 1.15, 95% CI 1.05 to 1.26) compared with non-Hispanic white women. Gynecologic oncology visit was associated with improved overall (p<0.001) and cancer specific (p<0.001) survival despite a longer time from presentation to treatment (p<0.001).

CONCLUSION

Longer time to diagnosis and treatment were associated with improved survival, suggesting that tumor specific features are more important prognostic factors than the time interval of workup and treatment. Significant sociodemographic disparities indicate social determinants of health influencing workup and care. Gynecologic oncologist visits were associated with improved survival, highlighting the importance of appropriate referral for suspected ovarian cancer.

Race-associated molecular changes in gynecologic malignancies

The difference in cancer morbidity and mortality between individuals of different racial groups is complex. Health disparities provide a framework to explore potential connections between poor outcomes and individuals of different racial backgrounds. This study identifies genomic changes in African-American patients with gynecologic malignancies, a population with well-established disparities in outcomes. Our data explore whether social health disparities might mediate interactions between the environment and tumor epigenomes and genomes that can be identified. Using The Cancer Genetic Ancestry Atlas, which encodes data from The Cancer Genome Atlas by ancestry and allows for systematic analyses of sequencing data by racial group, we performed large-scale, comparative analyses to identify novel targets with alterations in methylation, transcript, and microRNA expression between tumors from women of European American or African American racial groups across all gynecologic malignancies. We identify novel discrete genomic changes in these complex malignancies and suggest a framework for identifying novel therapeutic targets for future investigation.

Disparities in the Management of Peritoneal Surface Malignancies

Peritoneal surface malignancies are a group of aggressive cancers involving the peritoneum. Cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy can improve outcomes and survival in select patients. Despite significant advancements in care, racial disparities in peritoneal malignancy outcomes persist and may have even worsened over time. Poor adherence to guideline-recommended therapy introduces wide variability in patient care and often results in fewer options and suboptimal treatment of vulnerable populations. This review explores biological, sociodemographic, and environmental factors that contribute to disparities in peritoneal malignancy outcomes.

Racial disparities in non-recommendation of adjuvant chemotherapy in stage II-III ovarian cancer

OBJECTIVES

To identify patient factors associated with not receiving a recommendation for adjuvant chemotherapy after primary surgery for ovarian cancer.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study used the National Cancer Database (NCDB) data from 2004 to 2015 to identify patients with stage II-III ovarian cancer who underwent primary surgery. Multivariate logistic regression analyses evaluated factors associated with notation in the NCDB that "chemotherapy was not recommended/administered because it was contraindicated due to patient risk factors (i.e., comorbid conditions, advanced age)." Survival data were assessed via Kaplan-Meier analyses.

RESULTS

Of the 48,245 patients who met the inclusion criteria, 522 (1.08%) did not receive adjuvant chemotherapy because it was determined to be contraindicated. In multivariate analyses, independent predictors for not receiving a recommendation for adjuvant chemotherapy were age ≥ 70 years old (adjusted odds ratio, aOR = 2.43, p < 0.0001), non-zero Charlson-Deyo comorbidity scores (score 1, aOR = 1.41, p = 0.002; score ≥ 2, aOR = 2.57, p < 0.0001), and Black race (aOR = 2.12, p < 0.0001). For Black patients, recommendation against adjuvant chemotherapy occurred at a younger median age (64.5 years vs. 72 years) and was associated with lower 5-year survival (25.9% vs. 40.3%, p < 0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with ovarian cancer who underwent surgery but did not receive chemotherapy "because it was contraindicated due to patient risk factors" were older and had higher comorbidity scores. Even after controlling for these differences, Black patients were disproportionately not recommended for chemotherapy, which was associated with worse survival. Determining eligibility for adjuvant chemotherapy requires an individualized approach, and the possible influence of racial bias on risk estimation should be further investigated.

Incidence, prevalence, and trends in endometriosis diagnosis: a United States population-based study from 2006 to 2015

BACKGROUND

Accurate estimates of incidence and prevalence of endometriosis among nonselected cohorts are lacking in the United States, and earlier reports have produced varying results.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to define endometriosis incidence and prevalence in a US population and evaluate factors influencing these estimates over time.

STUDY DESIGN

A 10-year retrospective cohort study using Kaiser Permanente Washington electronic health records database was completed. The primary analysis included women enrollees aged 16 to 60 years, from January 2006 to December 2015, who had a uterus, were continuously enrolled for at least 2 years before cohort entry and had at least 1 healthcare utilization. Secondary analysis included all women enrollees aged 16 to 60 years during this time. Incident endometriosis was identified using the International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision and Tenth Revision, diagnosis codes. Annual incidence rates were age-adjusted by direct standardization to the 2015 study population. Secular trends in incidence overall and by 5-year age group, race and ethnicity, diagnosis modality, and practitioner type were assessed using Poisson regression analyses. Prevalent cases were defined as women enrolled in 2015 and had an endometriosis diagnosis before the end of 2015. The prevalence rates of chronic pelvic pain and dysmenorrhea defined by the International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision and Tenth Revision, diagnosis codes in 2006-2015 were estimated.

RESULTS

Among 332,056 eligible women who contributed 1,176,329 person-years during the 10-year study period, 2863 incident endometriosis cases were identified for an average incidence of 24.3 cases per 10,000 person-years. In our primary analysis, incidence rates declined over the study interval from a high of 30.2 per 10,000 person-years in 2006 to 17.4 per 10,000 person-years in 2015 and were highest among women aged 36 to 45 years in most years. Incidence rates were similar across race and ethnicity groups. The distribution of the 2863 incident cases by the diagnosis modality was as follows: 45.5% surgical, 5.7% imaging, and 48.8% clinical. Endometriosis incidence rates per 10,000 person-years were similar in women who were surgically and clinically diagnosed and decreased significantly from 2006 to 2015 (surgically diagnosed endometriosis dropped from 13.4 to 7.4 and clinically diagnosed endometriosis dropped from 16.1 to 8.9; P value of <.001 for linear trend over time for each). Incident case distribution by diagnosing provider was as follows: 73.6% obstetrician and gynecologist, 15.7% primary care provider, and 10.7% "other." Incidence of endometriosis diagnosed by an obstetrician and gynecologist and primary care provider decreased over the study interval (P<.001 for linear trend over time for each). Method of diagnosis and provider type did not differ by race and ethnicity. Among 135,162 women who contributed person-time in 2015, 2521 women were diagnosed with endometriosis, a prevalence rate of 1.9%. In our secondary analysis, the frequency of chronic pelvic pain diagnosis increased over the study interval from 3.0% in 2006 to 5.6% in 2015.

CONCLUSION

The incidence rates of endometriosis declined over the 10-year study interval and did so uniformly across age groups, races and ethnicities, and the main diagnosing modalities and providers. Declining rates may reflect a shift in practice patterns in the United States away from the diagnosis of endometriosis both clinically and surgically, rather than favoring more general diagnoses of chronic pelvic pain. The prevalence of endometriosis in 2015 in the United States is in keeping with data from recent studies outside the United States using health record data.

Factors impacting the time to ovarian cancer diagnosis based on classic symptom presentation in the United States

BACKGROUND

Patients with ovarian cancer often present with late-stage disease and nonspecific symptoms, but little is known about factors affecting the time to diagnosis (TTD) in the United States.

METHODS

A retrospective, population-based study of the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results-Medicare database was conducted. It included women 66 years old or older with stage II to IV epithelial ovarian cancer with at least 1 code for abdominal/pelvic pain, bloating, difficulty eating, or urinary symptoms within 1 year of the cancer diagnosis. TTD was defined from the first claim with a prespecified symptom to the ovarian cancer diagnosis. Kruskal-Wallis tests were used to assess for differences in TTD by group medians. Univariate and generalized linear models with a log-link function evaluated TTD by covariables.

RESULTS

For the 13,872 women analyzed, the mean and median times to diagnosis were 2.9 and 1.1 months, respectively. The median TTD differed significantly by first symptom (P < .001), number of symptoms (P < .001), and first physician specialty seen (P < .001). In a multivariable analysis, TTD differed significantly according to race/ethnicity (P < .001), geographic region (P = .001), urban-rural location (P = .031), emergency room presentation (P < .001), and number of specialties seen (P < .001). A shorter TTD was associated with a diagnosis in 2006-2010 (relative risk [RR], 0.92; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.87-0.98) or 2011-2015 (RR, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.81-0.93) in comparison with 1992-1999.

CONCLUSIONS

The time from a symptomatic presentation to care to a diagnosis of ovarian cancer is influenced by clinical and demographic variables. This study's findings reinforce the importance of educating all physicians on ovarian cancer symptoms to aid in diagnosis.

LAY SUMMARY

Ovarian cancer is often diagnosed once disease has spread because the classic symptoms of ovarian cancer-abdominal or pelvic pain, bloating, difficulty eating, and urinary issues-can be mistaken for other problems. This study examined the time between when women with classic ovarian cancer symptoms went to a physician and when they received a cancer diagnosis in a large database population. The authors found that the time to diagnosis differed according to the type and number of symptoms and what type of physician a woman saw as well as factors such as race, geographic location, and year of diagnosis.

Racial-Ethnic Comparison of Guideline-Adherent Gynecologic Cancer Care in an Equal-Access System

OBJECTIVE

To compare receipt of National Comprehensive Cancer Network Guideline-adherent treatment for gynecologic cancers, inclusive of uterine, cervical, and ovarian cancer, between non-Hispanic White women and racial-ethnic minority women in the equal-access Military Health System.

METHODS

We accessed MilCanEpi, which links data from the Department of Defense Central Cancer Registry and Military Health System Data Repository administrative claims data, to identify a cohort of women aged 18-79 years who were diagnosed with uterine, cervical, or ovarian cancer between January 1, 1998, and December 31, 2014. Information on tumor stage, grade, and histology was used to determine which treatment(s) (surgery, chemotherapy, radiotherapy) was indicated for each patient according to the National Comprehensive Cancer Network Guidelines during the period of the data (1998-2014). We compared non-Hispanic Black, Asian, and Hispanic women with non-Hispanic White women in their likelihood to receive guideline-adherent treatment using multivariable logistic regression models given as adjusted odds ratios (aORs) and 95% CIs.

RESULTS

The study included 3,354 women diagnosed with a gynecologic cancer of whom 68.7% were non-Hispanic White, 15.6% Asian, 9.0% non-Hispanic Black, and 6.7% Hispanic. Overall, 77.8% of patients received guideline-adherent treatment (79.1% non-Hispanic White, 75.9% Asian, 69.3% non-Hispanic Black, and 80.5% Hispanic). Guideline-adherent treatment was similar in Asian compared with non-Hispanic White patients (aOR 1.18, 95% CI 0.84-1.48) or Hispanic compared with non-Hispanic White women (aOR 1.30, 95% CI 0.86-1.96). Non-Hispanic Black patients were marginally less likely to receive guideline-adherent treatment compared with non-Hispanic White women (aOR 0.73, 95% CI 0.53-1.00, P=.011) and significantly less likely to receive guideline-adherent treatment than either Asian (aOR 0.65, 95% CI 0.44-0.97) or Hispanic patients (aOR 0.56, 95% CI 0.34-0.92).

CONCLUSION

Racial-ethnic differences in guideline-adherent care among patients in the equal-access Military Health System suggest factors other than access to care contributed to the observed disparities.

Racial-Ethnic and Socioeconomic Disparities in Guideline-Adherent Treatment for Endometrial Cancer

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the association of race-ethnicity and neighborhood socioeconomic status with adherence to National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines for endometrial carcinoma.

METHODS

Data are from the SEER (Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results) cancer registry of women diagnosed with endometrial carcinoma for the years 2006-2015. The sample included 83,883 women after inclusion and exclusion criteria were applied. Descriptive statistics, bivariate analyses, univariate, and multivariate logistic regression models were performed to evaluate the association between race-ethnicity and neighborhood socioeconomic status with adherence to treatment guidelines.

RESULTS

After controlling for demographic and clinical covariates, Black (odds ratio [OR] 0.89, P<.001), Latina (OR .92, P<.001), and American Indian or Alaska Native (OR 0.82, P=.034) women had lower odds of receiving adherent treatment and Asian (OR 1.14, P<.001) and Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander (OR 1.19 P=.012) women had higher odds of receiving adherent treatment compared with White women. After controlling for covariates, there was a gradient by neighborhood socioeconomic status: women in the high-middle (OR 0.89, P<.001), middle (OR 0.84, P<.001), low-middle (OR 0.80, P<.001), and lowest (OR 0.73, P<.001) neighborhood socioeconomic status categories had lower odds of receiving adherent treatment than the those in the highest neighborhood socioeconomic status group.

CONCLUSIONS

Findings from this study suggest there are racial-ethnic and neighborhood socioeconomic disparities in National Comprehensive Cancer Network treatment adherence for endometrial cancer. Standard treatment therapies should not differ based on sociodemographics. Interventions are needed to ensure that equitable cancer treatment practices are available for all individuals, regardless of racial-ethnic or socioeconomic background.

Differences in Sociodemographic Disparities Between Patients Undergoing Surgery for Advanced Colorectal or Ovarian Cancer

BACKGROUND

Cytoreductive surgery (CRS) for ovarian cancer with peritoneal metastases (OPM) is an established treatment, yet access-related racial and socioeconomic disparities are well documented. CRS for colorectal cancer with peritoneal metastases (CRPM) is garnering more widespread acceptance, and it is unknown what disparities exist with regards to access.

METHODS

This retrospective cross-sectional multicenter study analyzed medical records from the National Cancer Database from 2010 to 2015. Patients diagnosed with CRPM or ORP only and either no or confirmed resection were included. Patient- and facility-level characteristics were analyzed using uni- and multivariable logistic regressions to identify associations with receipt of CRS.

RESULTS

A total of 6634 patients diagnosed with CRPM and 14,474 diagnosed with OPM were included in this study. Among patients with CRPM, 18.1% underwent CRS. On multivariable analysis, female gender (odds ratio [95% CI] 2.04 [1.77-2.35]; P < 0.001) and treatment at an academic or research facility (OR 1.55 [1.17-2.05]; P = 0.002) were associated with CRS. Among patients with OPM, 87.1% underwent CRS. On multivariable analysis, treatment at facilities with higher-income patient populations was positively associated with CRS, while age (OR 0.97 [0.96-0.98]; P < .0001), use of nonprivate insurance (OR 0.69 [0.56-0.85]; P = 0.001), and listed as Black (OR 0.62 [0.45-0.86]; P = 0.004) were negatively associated with CRS.

CONCLUSION

There were more systemic barriers to CRS for patients with OPM than for patients with CRPM. As CRS becomes more widely practiced for CRPM, it is likely that more socioeconomic and demographic barriers will be elucidated.

Development of novel home-based tampon sampling for endometrial cancer: findings from community-based focus groups with Black and White women

Novel endometrial cancer (EC) early-detection approaches may reduce racial disparities in mortality. We conducted six community-based focus groups with White and Black women (N = 57 participants) in February-March 2020 to explore acceptability of a home-based tampon sampling approach for EC. Participants also completed a survey. Data were analyzed using qualitative content analysis. Awareness of EC and risk factors was low. Acceptability regarding home sampling was high, but participants expressed concerns about instruction complexity and potential risks. Black women reported lower comfort with tampons. Increasing EC awareness, self-efficacy, and familiarization with tampons would advance prospects for at-home sample collection for EC testing.

Incidence, clinical risk and prognostic factors for liver metastasis in patients with cervical cancer: a population-based retrospective study

BACKGROUND

Cervical cancer is one of the most frequent malignancies in women, particularly metastasis resulting in a poor prognosis. However, the clinical characteristics of cervical cancer patients with advanced liver metastasis have not been well investigated. We aimed to evaluate the incidence, clinical risk and prognostic factors for hepatic metastasis in cervical cancer patients.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The clinical features of patients diagnosed with cervical cancer were collected from the Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Result (SEER) public cancer database between 2010 and 2015. Multivariate logistic and Cox regression models were performed to identify potential risk and prognostic factors for liver metastasis in patients with cervical cancer.

RESULTS

A total of 431 patients (2.32%) developed liver metastasis in our analysis. The following characteristics were significantly associated with the development of liver metastasis: black ethnicity, uninsured status, higher tumor stage, poorer differentiated grade, non-squamous histology, non-surgery of primary site, patients with any additional lung, bone, and brain metastasis. Multivariate Cox regression showed that patients with additional lung metastasis, without radiotherapy, and without chemotherapy were negatively correlated with overall survival. Concurrent chemotherapy and radiotherapy was a favorable prognostic factor to improve overall survival, and chemotherapy showed to increase cause-specific survival. Additional lung metastasis was an independent characteristic for both risk and prognostic factors for hepatic metastasis in patients with cervical cancer.

CONCLUSION

Our results found several potential clinical features that may be used to assess the risk and prognosis of liver metastasis in patients with cervical cancer. These associated factors may provide clinical indications for the early identification and treatment of cervical cancer patients with hepatic metastasis.

Incorporating Measures of Structural Racism into Population Studies of Reproductive Health in the United States: A Narrative Review

Purpose: Black women in the United States face poor outcomes across reproductive health measures-from pregnancy outcomes to gynecologic cancers. Racial health inequities are attributable to systemic racism, but few population studies of reproductive health outcomes integrate upstream measures of systemic racism, and those who do are limited to maternal and infant health outcomes. Advances in understanding and intervening on the pathway from racism to reproductive health outcomes are limited by a paucity of methodological guidance toward this end. We aim to fill this gap by identifying quantitative measures of systemic racism that are salient across reproductive health outcomes. Methods: We conducted a review of literature from 2000 to 2019 to identify studies that use quantitative measures of exposure to systemic racism in population reproductive health studies. We analyzed the catalog of literature to identify cohesive domains and measures that integrate data across domains. For each domain, we contextualize its use within population health research, describe metrics currently in use, and present opportunities for their application to reproductive health research. Results: We identified four domains of systemic racism that may affect reproductive health outcomes: (1) civil rights laws and legal racial discrimination, (2) residential segregation and housing discrimination, (3) police violence, and (4) mass incarceration. Multiple quantitative measures are available for each domain. In addition, a multidimensional measure exists and additional domains of systemic racism are salient for future development into distinct measures. Conclusion: There are quantitative measures of systemic racism available for incorporation into population studies of reproductive health that investigate hypotheses, including and beyond those related to maternal and infant health. There are also promising areas for future measure development, such as the child welfare system and intersectionality. Incorporating such measures is critical for appropriate assessment of and intervention in racial inequities in reproductive health outcomes.

Are ethnic and racial minority women less likely to participate in clinical trials?

OBJECTIVES

Given the disparity that exists in enrollment of minorities to oncology clinical trials, the objective of our study was to assess whether race is associated with willingness to participate in gynecologic oncology clinical trials in a rural Southern academic medicine setting. Our secondary aim was to determine whether willingness to participate is impacted by an educational intervention.

METHODS

A single institution prospective survey study was performed at an academic medical center. Women presenting to the gynecologic oncology clinic with a current or prior diagnosis of gynecologic malignancy were approached to participate. The validated Attitudes to Randomized Trials Questionnaire (ARTQ) assessed willingness to participate in clinical trials. Relevant demographic and clinical data were abstracted. Characteristics were compared between those willing and unwilling to participate in clinical trials with a chi-square test for categorical variables and Wilcoxon rank sum tests for continuous data.

RESULTS

We enrolled 156 participants (50% White, 50% non-White) from May 2017 to January 2018. The minority group included 35% non-Hispanic Black, 9% Hispanic, 4% Asian, and 2% other. Median age was 63 years with endometrial cancer being the most common diagnosis (48%). On initial screen, only 35% were willing to participate in a clinical trial. Willingness to participate did not differ between race, age, marital status, education level, cancer type, stage, or mode of treatment. Rates improved to 82% after being provided additional educational information. Following education, White women and those with more education were significantly more willing to participate in clinical trials than their minority and less educated counterparts.

CONCLUSIONS

Willingness to participate improved among all sub-categories following an educational intervention. The increase in willingness was less robust among racial and ethnic minorities, suggesting that different tools are needed for recruitment of minorities to gynecologic oncology clinical trials.

Minority participation in phase 1 gynecologic oncology clinical trials: Three decades of inequity

OBJECTIVES

It is important to develop effective therapies in minorities to ensure equity in cancer care. Underrepresentation of minorities in early phase trials may cause therapies that are effective only in majority populations. We evaluated minority participation in gynecologic oncology phase 1 clinical trials.

METHODS

In peer-reviewed published articles of gynecologic oncology phase 1 clinical trials from years 1985 to 2018, we manually abstracted racial distribution of enrolled participants, cancer type, and year published. We calculated expected and observed ratios of racial participation on the basis of age-adjusted cancer incidence for race from the United States Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

RESULTS

We identified 357 articles of phase 1 trials (total, 9492 participants), including 213 articles on ovarian cancer (60%). Racial distribution of participants was available in 84 articles (23%) that included 2483 participants (26%): 1950 white (79%), 140 black (5%), and 393 other participants (16%). Other nonwhite races exceeded black enrollment in 46 of 84 trials (55%) that listed race. Enrollment of black participants was less than expected from disease incidence for ovarian (incidence-to-enrollment ratio, 18.5; P < .001), endometrial (3.6; P < .001), and cervical cancer (6.8; P < .001). No phase 1 study met expected enrollment for black participants. Frequency of black participants decreased 1.8-fold from 1995 to 1999 (8 of 70 participants [11%]) to 2015-2018 (55 of 892 participants [6%]; P < .025).

CONCLUSIONS

Major racial underrepresentation exists in gynecologic oncology phase 1 clinical trials. Enrollment of more black participants is needed to achieve racial equity.

Racial disparities in uterine and ovarian carcinosarcoma: A population-based analysis of treatment and survival

OBJECTIVE

To investigate racial disparities in uterine carcinosarcoma (UCS) and ovarian carcinosarcoma (OCS) in Commission on Cancer®-accredited facilities.

METHODS

Non-Hispanic Black (NHB) and non-Hispanic White (NHW) women in the National Cancer Database diagnosed with stage I-IV UCS or OCS between 2004 and 2014 were eligible. Differences by disease site or race were compared using Chi-square test and multivariate Cox analysis.

RESULTS

There were 2830 NHBs and 7366 NHWs with UCS, and 280 NHBs and 2586 NHWs with OCS. Diagnosis of UCS was more common in NHBs (11.5%) vs. NHWs (3.7%) and increased with age (P < .0001). OCS diagnosis remained <5% in both races and all ages. NHBs with UCS or OCS were more common in the South and more likely to have a comorbidity score ≥ 1, low neighborhood income and Medicaid or no insurance (P < .0001). Diagnosis at stage II-IV was more common in NHBs than NHWs with UCS but not OCS. NHBs with both UCS and OCS were less likely to undergo surgery and to achieve no gross residual disease with surgery (P = .002). Risk of death in NHB vs. NHW patients with UCS was 1.38 after adjustment for demographic factors and dropped after sequential adjustment for comorbidity score, neighborhood income, insurance status, stage and treatment by 4%, 16%, 7%, 19% and 10%, respectively, leaving 43.5% of the racial disparity in survival unexplained. In contrast, risk of death in NHBs vs. NHWs with OCS was 1.19 after adjustment for demographic factors and became insignificant after adjustment for comorbidity. Race was an independent prognostic factor in UCS but not in OCS.

CONCLUSIONS

Racial disparities exist in characteristics, treatment and survival in UCS and OCS with distinctions that merit additional research.

Beyond demographics: Missing sociodemographics in surgical research

INTRODUCTION

Reporting sociodemographic data in research is critical to describe participants, and to identify contributing factors for patient experience, outcomes and heterogeneity of treatment effect (HTE). Social determinants of health and clinical health characteristics are important drivers of outcomes, and prospective studies collecting participant-reported data offer an opportunity to report these sociodemographics and evaluate for associations with outcomes. Clinical trials have underreported these factors previously, but reporting has not been examined in surgical research.

METHODS

We reviewed prospective studies collecting participant-reported sociodemographic data from four surgical journals in 2016. The proportion of studies reporting variables of interest in "Table 1" is described. Variables included information on patient identity (e.g., age, sex), clinical health (e.g., disease-specific characteristics, BMI), individual-level (e.g., education, income) and interpersonal-level (e.g., marital status, support) risk factors.

RESULTS

Forty-one publications met inclusion criteria. All reported ≥1 patient identity variable, 93% reported ≥1 clinical characteristic, 63% reported ≥1 individual-level risk factor, and 7% reported an interpersonal-level risk factor. Age, sex, and disease-specific characteristics were reported most commonly (98%, 98%, 88% respectively). 40% of studies reported comorbidities, though <15% reported on mental health. 50% reported race, 27% reported ethnicity, 24% reported education level, and 22% reported functional status. Other examined factors were reported in <20% of publications.

DISCUSSION

Sociodemographics reported in these surgical journals may be insufficient to describe the participants studied. This highlights an opportunity for the surgical research community to develop consensus on reporting of important sociodemographics that may be drivers of patient experience, outcomes and HTE.