Disparities in refusal of surgery for gynecologic cancer

The interaction between social determinants of health and cervical cancer survival: A systematic review

OBJECTIVE

This systematic review aimed to investigate what are the most relevant social determinants of health (SDH), how they are measured, how they interact among themselves and what is their impact on the outcomes of cervical cancer patients.

METHODS

Search was performed in PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, Embase, Cochrane, and Google Scholar databases from January 2001 to September 2022. The protocol was registered at PROSPERO (CRD42022346854). We followed the PICOS strategy: Population- Patients treated for cervical cancer in the United States; Intervention - Any SDH; Comparison- None; Outcome measures- Cancer treatment outcomes related to the survival of the patients; Types of studies- Observational studies. Two reviewers extracted the data following the PRISMA guidelines. Joanna Briggs Institute Critical Appraisal Checklist for Analytical Cross-Sectional Studies was used for risk of bias (ROB) assessment.

RESULTS

Twenty-four studies were included (22 had low and 2 had moderate ROB). Most manuscripts analyzed data from public registries (83.3%) and only one SDH (54.17%). The SDH category of Neighborhood was not included in any study. Although the SDH were measured differently across the studies, not being married, receiving treatment at a low-volume hospital, and having public insurance (Medicaid or Medicare) or not being insured was associated with shorter survival of cervical cancer patients in most studies.

CONCLUSIONS

There is a deficit in the number of studies comprehensively assessing the impact of SDH on cervical cancer treatment-related outcomes. Marital status, hospital volume and health insurance status are potential predictors of worse outcome.

Disparities in Gynecologic Cancers

ABSTRACT

Gynecologic cancer disparities have different trends by cancer type and by sociodemographic/economic factors. We highlight disparities in the United States arising due to poor delivery of cancer care across the continuum from primary prevention, detection, and diagnosis through treatment and identify opportunities to eliminate/reduce disparities to achieve cancer health equity. Our review documents the persistent racial and ethnic disparities in cervical, ovarian, and uterine cancer outcomes, with Black patients experiencing the worst outcomes, and notes literature investigating social determinants of health, particularly access to care. Although timely delivery of screening and diagnostic evaluation is of paramount importance for cervical cancer, efforts for ovarian and uterine cancer need to focus on timely recognition of symptoms, diagnostic evaluation, and delivery of guideline-concordant cancer treatment, including tumor biomarker and somatic/germline genetic testing.

Reproductive Results in Cancer Survivors after Fertility Sparing Management: The Need for the Standardization of Definitions

In fertility-sparing management (FSM), two different issues can be distinguished: the risk of recurrence/death and the chance of childbearing. Survival is the principal outcome in oncology, and definitions of overall survival and progression-free survival are therefore well defined and widely accepted. The introduction of FSM to clinical practice was determined by the desire of young cancer patients to still have children. Initially, in small groups of patients, any pregnancy and/or childbirth were considered successes. Nowadays, FSM occupies an important place in cancer treatment, with thousands of young women treated successfully. However, in contrast to survival, no definition has been established for evaluating the reproductive outcomes of FSM. This review article evaluates the current pregnancy and birth rates of cancer patients. Differences between fertility-sparing and conservative treatment are analyzed, and improper and confusing interchangeable applications of these terms are pointed out. Additionally, various reasons for choosing FSM as a treatment method-which are not directly related to fertility preservation (treatment mismatch)-are presented. Uniform definitions of reproduction after FSM should be established to enable the comparison of results and facilitate the counseling of patients regarding the chances of reproduction.