Disparities in Lung Cancer Care and Outcomes among Elderly in a Medically Underserved State Population-A Cancer Registry-Linked Database Study

A scoping review of racial, ethnic, socioeconomic, and geographic disparities in the outcomes of older adults with cancer

INTRODUCTION

Cancer health disparities are widespread. Nevertheless, the disparities in outcomes among diverse survivors of cancer ages 65 years and older ("older") have not been systematically evaluated.

METHODS

We conducted a scoping review of original research articles published between January 2016 and September 2023 and indexed in Medline (Ovid), Embase, Scopus, and CINAHL databases. We included studies evaluating racial, ethnic, socioeconomic disadvantaged, geographic, sexual and gender, and/or persons with disabilities disparities in treatment, survivorship, and mortality among older survivors of cancer. We excluded studies with no a priori aims related to a health disparity, review articles, conference proceedings, meeting abstracts, studies with unclear methodologies, and articles in which the disparity group was examined only as an analytic covariate. Two reviewers independently extracted data following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis reporting guidelines.

RESULTS

After searching and removing duplicates, 2573 unique citations remained and after screening 59 articles met the inclusion criteria. Many investigated more than one health disparity, and most focused on racial and ethnic (n = 44) or socioeconomic (n = 25) disparities; only 10 studies described geographic disparities, and none evaluated disparities in persons with disabilities or due to sexual and gender identity. Research investigating disparities in outcomes among diverse older survivors of cancer is increasing gradually-68% of eligible articles were published between 2020 and 2023. Most studies focused on the treatment phase of care (n = 28) and mortality (n = 26), with 16 examined disparities in survivorship, symptoms, or quality of life. Most research was descriptive and lacked analyses of potential underlying mechanisms contributing to the reported disparities.

CONCLUSION

Little research has evaluated the effect of strategies to reduce health disparities among older patients with cancer. This lack of evidence perpetuates cancer inequities and leaves the cancer care system ill equipped to address the unique needs of the rapidly growing and increasingly diverse older adult cancer population.

Three-year follow-up study reveals improved survival rate in NSCLC patients underwent guideline-concordant diagnosis and treatment

Background

No studies in China have assessed the guideline-concordance level of the first-course of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) diagnosis and treatment and its relationship with survival. This study comprehensively assesses the current status of guideline-concordant diagnosis (GCD) and guideline-concordant treatment (GCT) of NSCLC in China and explores its impact on survival.

Methods

First course diagnosis and treatment data for NSCLC patients in Liaoning, China in 2017 and 2018 (n=1828) were used and classified by whether they underwent GCD and GCT according to Chinese Society of Clinical Oncology (CSCO) guidelines. Pearson's chi-squared test was used to determine unadjusted associations between categorical variables of interest. Logistic models were constructed to identify variables associated with GCD and GCT. Kaplan-Meier analysis and log-rank tests were used to estimate and compare 3-year survival rates. Multivariate Cox proportional risk models were constructed to assess the risk of cancer mortality associated with guideline-concordant diagnosis and treatment.

Results

Of the 1828 patients we studied, 48.1% underwent GCD, and 70.1% underwent GCT. The proportions of patients who underwent both GCD and GCT, GCD alone, GCT alone and neither GCD nor GCT were 36.7%, 11.4%, 33.5% and 18.4%, respectively. Patients in advanced stage and non-oncology hospitals were significantly less likely to undergo GCD and GCT. Compared with those who underwent neither GCD nor GCT, patients who underwent both GCD and GCT, GCD alone and GCT alone had 35.2%, 26.7% and 35.7% higher 3-year survival rates; the adjusted lung cancer mortality risk significantly decreased by 29% (adjusted hazard ratio[aHR], 0.71; 95% CI, 0.53-0.95), 29% (aHR, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.50-1.00) and 32% (aHR, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.51-0.90).

Conclusion

The 3-year risk of death is expected to be reduced by 29% if patients with NSCLC undergo both GCD and GCT. There is a need to establish an oncology diagnosis and treatment data management platform in China to monitor, evaluate, and promote the use of clinical practice guidelines in healthcare settings.

Lung cancer outcomes in the elderly: potential disparity in screening

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to analyse outcomes of lung cancer in the elderly.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis was performed of patients in the National Cancer Database with NSCLC from 2004 to 2017 grouped into 2 categories: 70-79 years (A) and 80-90 years (B). Patients with multiple malignancies were excluded. Kaplan-Meier curves estimated the overall survival for each age group based on stage.

RESULTS

In total, 466 051 patients were included. Less-invasive techniques (imaging and cytology) diagnosed cancer as a function of age: 14.6% in A vs 21.3% in B [P < 0.001, standardized mean difference (SMD) 0.175]. Clinical stage IA was least common in B (15%) compared to 17.3% in A (P < 0.001, SMD 0.079). Approximately 83.0% in B did not receive surgery compared to 70.0% in A (P < 0.001, SMD 0.299). Of the 83.0%, 8.0% were considered poor surgical candidates because of age or comorbidities compared with 6.2% in A (P < 0.001, SMD 0.299) For 71.0% in B, surgery was not the first treatment plan compared to 62.0% in A (P < 0.001, SMD 0.299). Survival curves showed worse prognosis for each clinical and pathologic stage for B compared to A.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients older than 80 years present less frequently as clinical stage IA, are less commonly offered surgical intervention and are more frequently diagnosed using less accurate measures. They also have worse outcomes for each stage compared to younger 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.

Improved guideline adherence in oncology through clinical decision-support systems: still hindered by current health IT infrastructures?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Despite several efforts to enhance guideline adherence in cancer management, the rate of adherence remains often dissatisfactory in clinical routine. Clinical decision-support systems (CDSS) have been developed to support the management of cancer patients by providing evidence-based recommendations. In this review, we focus on both current evidence supporting the beneficial effects of CDSS on guideline adherence as well as technical and structural requirements for CDSS implementation in clinical routine.

RECENT FINDINGS

Some studies have demonstrated a significant improvement of guideline adherence by CDSSs in oncologic diseases such as breast cancer, colon cancer, cervical cancer, prostate cancer, and hepatocellular carcinoma as well as in the management of cancer pain. However, most of these studies were rather small and designs rather simple. One reason for this limited evidence might be that CDSSs are only occasionally implemented in clinical routine. The main limitations for a broader implementation might lie in the currently existing clinical data infrastructures that do not sufficiently allow CDSS interoperability as well as in some CDSS tools themselves, if handling is hampered by poor usability.

SUMMARY

In principle, CDSSs improve guideline adherence in clinical cancer management. However, there are some technical und structural obstacles to overcome to fully implement CDSSs in clinical routine.

Disparities in localized malignant lung cancer surgical treatment: A population‐based cancer registry analysis

BACKGROUND

Lung cancer (LC) continues to be the leading cause of cancer deaths in the United States. Surgical treatment has proven to offer a favorable prognosis and a better 5-year relative survival for patients with early or localized tumors. This novel study investigates the factors associated with the odds of receiving surgical treatment for localized malignant LC in Tennessee.

METHODS

Population-based data of 9679 localized malignant LC patients from the Tennessee Cancer Registry (2005-2015) were utilized to examine the factors associated with receiving surgical treatment for localized malignant LC. Bivariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses, cross-tabulation, and Chi-Square ( χ ² ) tests were conducted to assess these factors.

RESULTS

Patients with localized malignant LC who initiated treatment after 2.7 weeks were 46% less likely to receive surgery (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] = 0.54; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.50-0.59; p < 0.0001). Females had a greater likelihood (AOR = 1.14; CI = 1.03-1.24) of receiving surgical treatment compared to men. Blacks had lower odds (AOR = 0.76; CI = 0.65-0.98) of receiving surgical treatment compared to Whites. All marital groups had higher odds of receiving surgical treatment compared to those who were single/never married. Patients living in Appalachian county had lower odds of receiving surgical treatment (AOR = 0.65; CI = 0.59-0.71) compared with those in the non-Appalachian county. Patients with private (AOR = 2.09; CI = 1.55-2.820) or public (AOR = 1.42; CI = 1.06-1.91) insurance coverage were more likely to receive surgical treatment compared to self-pay/uninsured patients. Overall, the likelihood of patients receiving surgical treatment for localized malignant LC decreases with age.

CONCLUSION

Disparities exist in the receipt of surgical treatment among patients with localized malignant LC in Tennessee. Health policies should target reducing these disparities to improve the survival of these patients.

Association between time-to-treatment and outcomes in non-small cell lung cancer: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

National targets for timely diagnosis and management of a potential cancer are driven in part by the perceived risk of disease progression during avoidable delays. However, it is unclear to what extent time-to-treatment impacts prognosis for patients with non-small cell lung cancer, with previous reviews reporting mixed or apparently paradoxical associations. This systematic review focuses on potential confounders in order to identify particular patient groups which may benefit most from timely delivery of care.

METHODS

Medline, EMBASE and Cochrane databases were searched for publications between January 2012 and October 2020, correlating timeliness in secondary care pathways to patient outcomes. The protocol is registered with PROSPERO (the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews; ID 99239). Prespecified factors (demographics, performance status, histology, stage and treatment) are examined through narrative synthesis.

RESULTS

Thirty-seven articles were included. All but two were observational. Timely care was generally associated with a worse prognosis in those with advanced stage disease (6/8 studies) but with better outcomes for patients with early-stage disease treated surgically (9/12 studies). In one study, patients with squamous cell carcinoma referred for stereotactic ablative radiotherapy benefited more from timely care, compared with patients with adenocarcinoma. One randomised controlled trial supported timeliness as being advantageous in those with stage I-IIIA disease.

CONCLUSION

There are limitations to the available evidence, but observed trends suggest timeliness to be of particular importance in surgical candidates. In more advanced disease, survival trends are likely outweighed by symptom burden, performance status or clinical urgency dictating timeliness of treatment.

Association Between Granulocyte Colony-Stimulating Factor (G-CSF) Use and Myelodysplastic Syndrome (MDS) or Acute Myeloid Leukemia (AML) Among Elderly Patients with Breast, Lung, or Prostate Cancer

INTRODUCTION

Patients diagnosed with cancer have an increased risk both for myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS) and for acute myeloid leukemia (AML) following treatment.

METHODS

Using SEER-Medicare data, we selected patients aged 66 years and older who completed systemic therapy between 2002 and 2014 for breast (stage I-III), lung (stage I-III), or prostate (stage I-IV) cancer. For each cancer, we estimated the risk of a composite endpoint of MDS or AML in patients receiving granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) vs. not.

RESULTS

The 10-year cumulative risk difference (granulocyte colony-stimulating factor [G-CSF] - no G-CSF) for MDS-AML was 0.45% (95% CI 0.13-0.77%) in breast cancer and 0.39% (95% CI 0.15-0.62%) in lung cancer. G-CSF use was associated with a hazard ratio of 1.60 (95% CI 1.07-2.40) in breast cancer and 1.50 (95% CI 0.99-2.29) in lung cancer. Filgrastim use was associated with a hazard ratio of 1.01 (95% CI 1.00-1.03) per administration in breast cancer and 1.02 (95% CI 0.99-1.05) per administration in lung cancer. Pegfilgrastim was associated with a hazard ratio of 1.08 (95% CI 1.01-1.15) per administration in breast cancer and 1.12 (95% CI 1.00-1.25) per administration in lung cancer. Analyses in prostate cancer were limited because of the low number of events.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of G-CSF in patients diagnosed with breast and lung cancer is associated with an increased risk of MDS-AML. However, the MDS-AML absolute risk difference is very low.

Predictors of treatment initiation and mapping the cancer diagnostic pathway: A retrospective observational cohort study of patients with metastatic non-small cell lung cancer

BACKGROUND

Health-care providers in the US revealed that a substantial proportion of mNSCLC patients do not receive any first-line therapy and the biggest gaps in care are time inefficiencies in the diagnostic process. The goal of this study was to determine whether such gaps are found in Israel where healthcare is universal and participation in a medical insurance plan is free and compulsory.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective, observational cohort study using the computerized data of Maccabi Healthcare Services, a 2.5 million-member state-mandated health-service. Patients with mNSCLC diagnosed between 2017 and 2018 were followed until December 2019.

RESULTS

Among 434 patients (62% male, mean age 68 y, 74% adenocarcinoma), 345 (79%) initiated first-line treatment. Compared to treated, untreated patients (n = 89) were more likely to be older (mean [SD]=71 years [10] vs. 67 [10], p < 0.001), have a higher co-morbidity index (5.6 ([4.4] vs. 4.0 [3.4], p < 0.001), smokers (84% vs. 66%, p = 0.001), and require hospitalization in the year prior to diagnosis (80% vs 61%, p = 0.002). There was no difference in socioeconomic status. Time from first symptom to imaging was longer for untreated than treated patients (6.51 months [4.24, 7.33] vs 3.48 months [2.76, 4.34] respectively, p = 0.22). Predictors of treatment initiation included age< 70 years, non-smokers, EGFR testing performed, ECOG performance status 0-1 and shorter wait from first symptom to imaging. Median time from first symptom to initiation of 1 L, was 7.76 months (6.51-8.75).

CONCLUSION

The proportion of untreated mNSCLC patients are comparable to those reported in the US; we did not find health disparities between socioeconomic levels. Our data suggest that the main barrier to effective diagnostic process is the wait between symptom complaint and imaging.

The Impact of COVID-19 on the Diagnosis and Treatment of Lung Cancer at a Canadian Academic Center: A Retrospective Chart Review

The large burden of COVID-19 on health care systems worldwide has raised concerns among medical oncologists about the impact of COVID-19 on the diagnosis and treatment of lung cancer patients. In this retrospective cohort study, we investigated the impact of COVID-19 on lung cancer diagnosis and treatment before and during the COVID-19 era. New lung cancer diagnoses decreased by 34.7% during the pandemic with slightly more advanced stages of disease, there was a significant increase in the utilization of radiosurgery as the first definitive treatment, and a decrease in both systemic treatment as well as surgery compared to the pre-COVID-19 era. There was no significant delay in starting chemotherapy and radiation treatment during the pandemic compared to pre-COVID-19 time. However, we observed a delay to lung cancer surgery during the pandemic time. COVID-19 seems to have had a major impact at our lung cancer center on the diagnoses and treatment patterns of lung cancer patients. Many oncologists fear that they will see an increase in newly diagnosed lung cancer patients in the coming year. This study is still ongoing and further data will be collected and analyzed to better understand the total impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on our lung cancer patient population.

Neoadjuvant Therapy in Stage II/III Rectal Cancer: A Retrospective Study in a Disparate Population and the Effect on Survival

BACKGROUND

Kentucky has one of the highest rectal cancer incidences in the United States. High poverty rates have led to poor insurance coverage and inadequate access to care. The treatment of locally advanced rectal cancer utilizes a multimodal regimen requiring regular access to expert care. The rate of receipt of neoadjuvant therapy in Kentucky is unknown.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to evaluate the rate and factors associated with the receipt of neoadjuvant therapy for localized advanced rectal cancer in Kentucky and the effect on overall survival.

DESIGN

This is a retrospective database review.

SETTINGS

This study was conducted by utilizing the Kentucky Cancer Registry at an academic center.

PATIENTS

All patients diagnosed with stage II/III rectal adenocarcinoma from 2005 to 2015 in the Commonwealth of Kentucky were included.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary outcomes measured were the factors associated with nonreceipt of neoadjuvant therapy and overall survival.

RESULTS

Of 1896 patients, only 46.8% received neoadjuvant therapy. Factors associated with not receiving neoadjuvant therapy included older age, female sex, low education level, high poverty level, and treatment at nonacademic centers. Survival analysis demonstrated significantly improved survival in patients receiving neoadjuvant therapy compared with other treatment regimens.

LIMITATIONS

This study was limited by the retrospective nature of the review and by unmeasured confounders.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study was the first to evaluate the factors behind the low rates of neoadjuvant therapy for locally advanced rectal cancer in Kentucky. Neoadjuvant therapy in this population is beneficial for survival; efforts should be made in policy and education with focus on older patients, female patients, and treatment at nonacademic centers. Centralization of rectal cancer care improves outcomes, but we must be aware of the effect it may have on disparate populations with poor access. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B596.

TERAPIA NEOADYUVANTE EN EL MANEJO DEL CNCER DE RECTO EN ESTADIO II / III UN ESTUDIO RETROSPECTIVO EN UNA POBLACIN DISPAR Y EL EFECTO EN LA SUPERVIVENCIA

ANTECEDENTES:El estado de Kentucky tiene una de las mayores incidencias de cáncer de recto en los EE. UU. Debido a una alta tasa de pobreza, el porcentaje de la población que cuenta con seguro de salud, es muy limitado, y por lo tanto el acceso a una atención de alto nivel es muy bajo. El tratamiento del cáncer de recto localmente avanzado, es multidisciplinario, lo que exige acceso y disponibilidad a un grupo experto. Se desconoce la tasa de pacientes que reciben terapia neoadyuvante en Kentucky.OBJETIVO:Establecer la tasa y los factores asociados con el uso de terapia neoadyuvante en el tratamiento del cáncer de recto localmente avanzado en Kentucky, y su efecto en la supervivencia global.DISEÑO:Revisión retrospectiva de una base de datos.ESCENARIO:Este estudio se llevó a cabo utilizando el Registro de Cáncer de Kentucky en un centro académico.PACIENTES:Se incluyen todos los pacientes diagnosticados con adenocarcinoma de recto, de la Mancomunidad (Commonwealth) de Kentucky, en estadio II / III entre 2005 y 2015.PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE RESULTADO:Establecer los factores asociados con el hecho de no recibir terapia neoadyuvante; y establecer la supervivencia global.RESULTADOS:De 1896 pacientes evaluados, solo el 46,8% recibió terapia neoadyuvante. Los factores asociados, para no haber recibido terapia neoadyuvante fueron: la edad avanzada, sexo femenino, bajo nivel educativo, alto nivel de pobreza y tratamiento en centros no académicos. El análisis de la supervivencia mostró una supervivencia significativamente mejor en los pacientes que recibieron terapia neoadyuvante en comparación con otros esquemas de tratamiento.LIMITACIONES:Revisión retrospectiva, factores de confusión no medidos.CONCLUSIONES:Nuestro estudio ha sido el primero en evaluar los factores determinantes de las bajas tasas de terapia neoadyuvante para el tratamiento del cáncer de recto localmente avanzado en Kentucky. La terapia neoadyuvante mejora y favorece la supervivencia en esta población, por lo tanto se deben hacer esfuerzos en las políticas de salud, así como en educación, enfocados a los pacientes mayores, pacientes femeninas y tratamiento en centros no académicos. El centralizar la atención del cáncer de recto, mejora los resultados, pero debemos ser conscientes del efecto que puede tener en poblaciones desiguales económicamente, con acceso deficiente a la posibilidad de recibir atención de alto nivel. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B596.

Impact of Delays in Lung Cancer Treatment on Survival

Timely care is an important dimension of health care quality, but the impact of delays in care on lung cancer outcomes is unclear. Quantifying the impact of delays in cancer treatment on survival is necessary to inform resource allocation, quality improvement initiatives, and lung cancer guidelines. Review of the available literature demonstrated significant heterogeneity between studies in terms of the impact of delay. Frequently paradoxical results were reported, with delay being associated with improved survival in patients with advanced disease. However, significant methodologic flaws were identified in many studies, which probably is the reason for the paradoxical results. The most significant methodologic limitations identified were incorrectly controlling for final pathologic stage (a mediator in the causal chain from delay to survival), failure to control for confounding by acuity of cancer presentation, and failure to consider effect measure modification. The effect of delay on survival probably varies by stage. The impact of delays is lowest for subcentimeter nodules, probably highest in stage II disease, and low in patients who are only eligible for palliative care. Precise quantification of the impact of delay is not currently possible. Given the available evidence, quality metrics for the timeliness of lung cancer care should focus on local barriers to care. These metrics should be carefully designed to take into account clinical-radiographic stage at initial presentation.

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.

Association between Receipt of Guideline-Concordant Lung Cancer Treatment and Individual- and Area-Level Factors: A Spatio-Temporal Analysis

BACKGROUND

Guideline-concordant treatment (GCT) of lung cancer has been observed to vary across geographic regions over the years. However, there is little evidence as to what extent this variation is explained by differences in patients' clinical characteristics versus contextual factors, including socioeconomic inequalities.

METHODS

This study evaluated the independent effects of individual- and area-level risk factors on geographic and temporal variation in receipt of GCT among patients with lung cancer. Receipt of GCT was defined on the basis of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines. We used Bayesian spatial-temporal multilevel models to combine individual and areal predictors and outcomes while accounting for geographically structured and unstructured correlation and linear and nonlinear trends.

RESULTS

Our study included 4,854 non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and small cell lung cancer (SCLC) cases, reported to the Victorian Lung Cancer Registry between 2011 and 2018. Area-level data comprised socioeconomic disadvantage and remoteness data at the local government area level in Victoria, Australia. Around 60.36% of patients received GCT, and the rates varied across geographic areas over time. This variation was mainly associated with poor performance status, advanced clinical stages, NSCLC types, public hospital insurance, area-level deprivation, and comorbidities.

CONCLUSIONS

This study highlights the need to address disparities in receipt of GCT among patients with lung cancer with poor performance status, NSCLC, advanced clinical stage, stage I-III SCLC, stage III NSCLC, public hospital insurance, and comorbidities, and living in socioeconomically disadvantaged areas.

IMPACT

Two-year mortality outcomes significantly improved with GCT. Interventions aimed at reducing these inequalities could help to improve lung cancer outcomes.

Evaluation of a National Comprehensive Cancer Network Guidelines-Based Decision Support Tool in Patients With Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: A Nonrandomized Clinical Trial

IMPORTANCE

The association of guideline-based decision support with the quality of care in patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is not known.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the association of exposure to the National Comprehensive Cancer Center (NCCN) guidelines with guideline-concordant care and patients' decisional conflict.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

A nonrandomized clinical trial, conducted at a tertiary care academic institution, enrolled patients from February 23, 2015, to September 28, 2017. Data analysis was conducted from July 19, 2019, to April 22, 2020. A cohort of 76 patients with NSCLC seen at diagnosis or disease progression and a retrospective cohort of 157 patients treated before the trial were included. Adherence to 6 NCCN recommendations were evaluated: (1) smoking cessation counseling, (2) adjuvant chemotherapy for patients with stage IB to IIB NSCLC after surgery, (3) pathologic mediastinal staging in patients with stage III NSCLC before surgery, (4) pathologic mediastinal staging in patients with stage III NSCLC before nonsurgical treatment, (5) definitive chemoradiotherapy for patients with stage III NSCLC not having surgery, and (6) molecular testing for epidermal growth factor receptor and anaplastic lymphoma kinase alterations for patients with stage IV NSCLC. Subgroup analysis was conducted to compare the rates of guideline concordance between the prospective and retrospective cohorts. Secondary end points included decisional conflict and satisfaction.

INTERVENTIONS

An online tool customizing the NCCN guidelines to patients' clinical and pathologic features was used during consultation, facilitated by a trained coordinator.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Concordance of practice with 6 NCCN treatment recommendations on NSCLC and patients' decisional conflict.

RESULTS

Of the 76 patients with NSCLC, 44 were men (57.9%), median age at diagnosis was 68 years (interquartile range [IQR], 41-87 years), and 59 patients (77.6%) had adenocarcinoma. In the retrospective cohort, 91 of 157 patients (58.0%) were men, median age at diagnosis was 66 years (IQR, 61-65 years), and 105 patients (66.9%) had adenocarcinoma. After the intervention, patients received more smoking cessation counseling (4 of 5 [80.0%] vs 1 of 24 [4.2%], P < .001) and less adjuvant chemotherapy (0 of 7 vs 7 of 11 [63.6%]; P = .012). There was no significant change in mutation testing of non-squamous cell stage IV disease (20 of 20 [100%] vs 48 of 57 [84.2%]; P = .10). There was no significant change in pathologic mediastinal staging or initial chemoradiotherapy for patients with stage III disease. After consultation with the tool, decisional conflict scores improved by a median of 20 points (IQR, 3-34; P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

The findings of this study suggest that exposure to the NCCN guidelines is associated with increased guideline-concordant care for 2 of 6 preselected recommendations and improvement in decisional conflict.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03982459.

The Use of Bronchoscopy During the Coronavirus Disease 2019 Pandemic: CHEST/AABIP Guideline and Expert Panel Report

BACKGROUND

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has swept the globe and is causing significant morbidity and mortality. Given that the virus is transmitted via droplets, open airway procedures such as bronchoscopy pose a significant risk to health-care workers (HCWs). The goal of this guideline was to examine the current evidence on the role of bronchoscopy during the COVID-19 pandemic and the optimal protection of patients and HCWs.

STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS

A group of approved panelists developed key clinical questions by using the Population, Intervention, Comparator, and Outcome (PICO) format that addressed specific topics on bronchoscopy related to COVID-19 infection and transmission. MEDLINE (via PubMed) was systematically searched for relevant literature and references were screened for inclusion. Validated evaluation tools were used to assess the quality of studies and to grade the level of evidence to support each recommendation. When evidence did not exist, suggestions were developed based on consensus using the modified Delphi process.

RESULTS

The systematic review and critical analysis of the literature based on six PICO questions resulted in six statements: one evidence-based graded recommendation and 5 ungraded consensus-based statements.

INTERPRETATION

The evidence on the role of bronchoscopy during the COVID-19 pandemic is sparse. To maximize protection of patients and HCWs, bronchoscopy should be used sparingly in the evaluation and management of patients with suspected or confirmed COVID-19 infections. In an area where community transmission of COVID-19 infection is present, bronchoscopy should be deferred for nonurgent indications, and if necessary to perform, HCWs should wear personal protective equipment while performing the procedure even on asymptomatic patients.

Not Following the Rules in Guideline Care for Lung Cancer Diagnosis and Staging Has Negative Impact

BACKGROUND

Recent studies have identified poor adherence to recommended guidelines in diagnosing and staging patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), and this practice has been associated with numerous negative downstream effects. However, these reports consist predominantly of large administrative databases with inherent limitations. We aimed to describe guideline-inconsistent care and identify any associated factors within the Swedish Cancer Institute health care system.

METHODS

A review of patients with a diagnosis of primary NSCLC between January 1, 2014 and December 31, 2014 within our community hospital network was performed. Univariate and multivariable logistic regression analyses were performed to identify factors associated with guideline-inconsistent care.

RESULTS

Guideline-inconsistent care was identified in 24% (98 of 406) of patients: 58% (46 of 81) in clinical stage III and 29% (52 of 179) in stage IV. Of the 46 clinical stage III patients with guideline-inconsistent care, 43% (20) had no invasive mediastinal lymph node sampling before treatment initiation. Patients with guideline-inconsistent care more frequently underwent additional invasive procedures and had a delay in management. Regression analyses identified clinical stage III disease, stage IV with distant metastases, and specialty ordering the diagnostic test to be associated with guideline-inconsistent care.

CONCLUSIONS

Guideline-inconsistent diagnosis and staging of patients with NSCLC, particularly patients with stage III disease, are highly prevalent. This finding is associated with incomplete staging, a higher number of additional procedures, and a delay in management. The identification of this vulnerable population may serve as a target for quality improvement interventions aimed to increase adherence to guidelines while decreasing unnecessary procedures and time to treatment.

Cost and Utilization of Lung Cancer End-of-Life Care Among Racial-Ethnic Minority Groups in the United States

BACKGROUND

The end-of-life period is a crucial time in lung cancer care. To have a better understanding of the racial-ethnic disparities in health care expenditures, access, and quality, we evaluated these disparities specifically in the end-of-life period for patients with lung cancer in the U.S.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We used the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER)-Medicare database to analyze characteristics of lung cancer care among those diagnosed between the years 2000 and 2011. Linear and logistic regression models were constructed to measure racial-ethnic disparities in end-of-life care cost and utilization among non-Hispanic (NH) Asian, NH black, Hispanic, and NH white patients while controlling for other risk factors such as age, sex, and SEER geographic region.

RESULTS

Total costs and hospital utilization were, on average, greater among racial-ethnic minorities compared with NH white patients in the last month of life. Among patients with NSCLC, the relative total costs were 1.27 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.21-1.33) for NH black patients, 1.36 (95% CI, 1.25-1.49) for NH Asian patients, and 1.21 (95% CI, 1.07-1.38) for Hispanic patients. Additionally, the odds of being admitted to a hospital for NH black, NH Asian, and Hispanic patients were 1.22 (95% CI, 1.15-1.30), 1.47 (95% CI, 1.32-1.63), and 1.18 (95% CI, 1.01-1.38) times that of NH white patients, respectively. Similar results were found for patients with SCLC.

CONCLUSION

Minority patients with lung cancer have significantly higher end-of-life medical expenditures than NH white patients, which may be explained by a greater intensity of care in the end-of-life period.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

This study investigated racial-ethnic disparities in the cost and utilization of medical care among lung cancer patients during the end-of-life period. Compared with non-Hispanic white patients, racial-ethnic minority patients were more likely to receive intensive care in their final month of life and had statistically significantly higher end-of-life care costs. The findings of this study may lead to a better understanding of the racial-ethnic disparities in end-of-life care, which can better inform future end-of-life interventions and help health care providers develop less intensive and more equitable care, such as culturally competent advanced care planning programs, for all patients.

Patterns of Care and Survival in Stage III NSCLC Among Black and Latino Patients Compared With White Patients

BACKGROUND

Race and socioeconomic status have continued to affect the survival and patterns of care of patients with non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). However, data evaluating these associations in patients with stage III disease remain limited. Therefore, we investigated the patterns of care and overall survival (OS) of black and Latino patients with locally advanced NSCLC compared with white patients, using the National Cancer Database.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

All patients with stage III NSCLC from 2004 to 2013 who had undergone external beam radiotherapy (RT) alone, RT with chemotherapy (bimodality), or RT with chemotherapy followed by surgery (trimodality) were analyzed within the National Cancer Database according to race (n = 113,945). Univariate associations among the demographic, disease, and treatment characteristics within the 3 cohorts were assessed using χ2 tests. The OS between cohorts were analyzed using the log-rank test and multivariate Cox proportional hazards regression.

RESULTS

The black and Latino patients were younger at diagnosis, had lower median household incomes, and were less likely to be insured than were the white patients. The black patients were more likely to receive RT alone (19.3% vs. 18%; P < .001) and less likely to have undergone concurrent chemo-RT (53.6% vs. 56.1%; P < .001) compared with the white patients. Black patients had improved OS (P < .001). In contrast, the Latino patients had survival equivalent to that of the white patients (P = .920).

CONCLUSIONS

Despite epidemiologic differences and a propensity for less aggressive treatment, black patients with locally advanced NSCLC had better OS than white patients and Latino patients had equivalent outcomes. Additional research is needed to elucidate this finding, perhaps focusing on biological differences among the cohorts.

Association Between Rurality and Lung Cancer Treatment Characteristics and Timeliness

BACKGROUND

Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer-related mortality in the United States, and rural states bear a greater burden of disease.

METHODS

We analyzed tumor registry data to examine relationships between rurality and lung cancer stage at diagnosis and treatment. Cases were from the Maine Cancer Registry from 2012 to 2015, and rurality was defined using rural-urban commuting areas. Multivariable models were used to examine the relationships between rurality and treatment, adjusting for age, sex, poverty, education, insurance status, and cancer stage.

RESULTS

We identified 5,338 adults with incident lung cancer; 3,429 (64.2%) were diagnosed at a late stage (III or IV). Rurality was not associated with stage at diagnosis. For patients with early-stage disease (I or II), rurality was not associated with receipt of treatment. However, for patients with late-stage disease, residents of large rural areas received more surgery (10%) compared with metropolitan (9%) or small/isolated rural areas (6%), P = .01. In multivariable analyses, patients in large rural areas received more chemotherapy (OR 1.48; 95% CI: 1.08-2.02) than those in metropolitan areas. Patients with early-stage disease residing in small/ isolated rural areas had delays in treatment (median time to first treatment = 43 days, interquartile range [IQR] 22-68) compared with large rural (34 days, IQR 17-55) and metropolitan areas (35 days, IQR 17-60), P = .0009.

CONCLUSION

Rurality is associated with differences in receipt of specific lung cancer treatments and in timeliness of treatment.

Accessibility of Prenatal Care Can Affect Inequitable Health Outcomes of Pregnant Women Living in Obstetric Care Underserved Areas: a Nationwide Population-Based Study

BACKGROUND

As of 2011, among 250 administrative districts in Korea, 54 districts did not have obstetrics and gynecology clinics or hospitals providing prenatal care and delivery services. The Korean government designated 38 regions among 54 districts as "Obstetric Care Underserved Areas (OCUA)." However, little is known there are any differences in pregnancy, prenatal care, and outcomes of women dwelling in OCUA compared to women in other areas. The purposes of this study were to compare the pregnancy related indicators (PRIs) and adequacy of prenatal care between OCUA region and non-OCUA region.

METHODS

Using National Health Insurance database in Korea from January 1, 2012 to December 31, 2014, we constructed the whole dataset of women who terminated pregnancy including delivery and abortion. We assessed incidence rate of 17 PRIs and adequacy of prenatal care. All indicators were compared between OCUA group and non-OCUA group.

RESULTS

The women dwelling in OCUA regions were more likely to get abortion (4.6% in OCUA vs. 3.6% in non-OCUA) and receive inadequate prenatal care (7.2% vs. 4.4%). Regarding abortion rate, there were significant regional differences in abortion rate. The highest abortion rate was 10.3% and the lowest region was 1.2%. Among 38 OCUA regions, 29 regions' abortion rates were higher than the national average of abortion rate (3.56%) and there were 10 regions in which abortion rates were higher than 7.0%. In addition, some PRIs such as acute pyelonephritis and transfusion in obstetric hemorrhage were more worse in OCUA regions compared to non-OCUA regions.

CONCLUSION

PRIs are different according to the regions where women are living. The Korean government should make an effort reducing these gaps of obstetric cares between OCUA and non-OCUA.

The pervasive crisis of diminishing radiation therapy access for vulnerable populations in the United States-Part 4: Appalachian patients

Purpose

Compared with the rest of the United States, the population of Appalachia has lower education levels, higher rates of poverty, and limited access to health care. The presence of disparities in radiation therapy (RT) access for Appalachian patients with cancer has rarely been examined.

Methods and materials

The National Cancer Institute initiatives toward addressing disparities in treatment access for rural populations were examined. An extensive literature search was undertaken for studies investigating RT access disparities in Appalachian patients, beginning with the most common cancers in these patients (lung, colorectal, and cervical).

Results

Although the literature investigating RT access disparities in Appalachia is relatively sparse, studies examining lung, colorectal, cervical, prostate, head and neck, breast, and esophageal cancer, as well as lymphoma, indicate an unfortunate commonality in barriers to optimal RT access for Appalachian patients with cancer. These barriers are predominantly socioeconomic in nature (low income and lack of private insurance) but are exacerbated by paucities in both the number and quality of radiation centers that are accessible to this patient population.

Conclusions

Regardless of organ system, there are significant barriers for Appalachian patients with cancer to receive RT. Such diminished access is alarming and warrants resources devoted to addressing these disparities, which often go overlooked because of the assumption that the overall wealth of the United States is tangibly applicable to all of its citizens. Without intelligently targeted investments of time and finances in this arena, there is great risk of exacerbating rather than alleviating the already heavy burden facing Appalachian patients with cancer.

Interaction between treatment delivery delay and stage on the mortality from non-small cell lung cancer

Background

The aim of this study is to evaluate the interaction between treatment delay and stage on the mortality from non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC).

Methods

We performed a survival analysis in a cohort of patients admitted to the reference cancer center. The following data were collected: age, gender, smoking status, tumor staging, type of lung cancer, and time from the date when the patient was diagnosed with cancer to the starting date of effective treatment. Univariable and multivariable Cox proportional hazard models were used to investigate the association between potential confounders identified during the study design. After the final adjusted model was determined, tests for interaction among all predictors were performed.

Results

Inclusion criteria were met by 359 patients. In the adjusted analysis, delayed treatment delivery was a protective factor for the risk of death, with a crude hazard ratio (HR) =0.75 (0.59-0.97; P=0.02) and an adjusted HR =0.59 (0.46-0.77; P<0.001). However, a statistically significant interaction with mortality was observed between timely treatment and tumor stage. Patients with stage II disease who received delayed treatment had a higher risk of death [HR =3.08 (1.05-9.0; P=0.04)]. On the other hand, stage IV patients who received delayed treatment had a 52% reduction in mortality [HR =0.48 (0.35-0.66; P<0.001)].

Conclusions

Stage of disease influenced the association between start of the treatment and mortality, and only the subgroup of stage II patients seemed to benefit from early treatment.

Lung cancer care trajectory at a Canadian centre: an evaluation of how wait times affect clinical outcomes

BACKGROUND

Lung cancer continues to be one of the most common cancers in Canada, with approximately 28,400 new cases diagnosed each year. Although timely care can contribute substantially to quality of life for patients, it remains unclear whether it also improves patient outcomes. In this work, we used a set of quality indicators that aim to describe the quality of care in lung cancer patients. We assessed adherence with existing guidelines for timeliness of lung cancer care and concordance with existing standards of treatment, and we examined the association between timeliness of care and lung cancer survival.

METHODS

Patients with lung cancer diagnosed between 2010 and 2015 were identified from the Pulmonary Division Lung Cancer Registry at our centre.

RESULTS

We demonstrated that the interdisciplinary pulmonary oncology service successfully treated most of its patients within the recommended wait times. However, there is still work to be done to decrease variation in wait time. Our results demonstrate a significant association between wait time and survival, supporting the need for clinicians to optimize the patient care trajectory.

INTERPRETATION

It would be helpful for Canadian clinicians treating patients with lung cancer to have wait time guidelines for all treatment modalities, together with standard definitions for all time intervals. Any reductions in wait times should be balanced against the need for thorough investigation before initiating treatment. We believe that our unique model of care leads to an acceleration of diagnostic steps. Avoiding any delay associated with referral to a medical oncologist for treatment could be an acceptable strategy with respect to reducing wait time.

A retrospective analysis of delays in the diagnosis of lung cancer and associated costs

Purpose

Diagnosis of lung cancer at advanced stages can result in missed treatment opportunities, worse outcomes, and higher health care costs. This study evaluated the wait time to diagnose non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and the cost of diagnosis and treatment based on the stage at diagnosis.

Patients and methods

Adult patients diagnosed with NSCLC between January 2007 and September 2011 were identified from a proprietary oncology registry and linked to health insurance claims from a large US health insurance company. Continuous enrollment in the health plan was required for at least 12 months prediagnosis (baseline) and at least 3 months postdiagnosis (follow-up). Use of diagnostic tests and time to diagnosis were examined. The rates of health care utilization and per-patient per-month (PPPM) health care costs were calculated.

Results

A total of 1,210 patients with NSCLC were included in the analysis. Most patients (93.6%) had evidence of diagnostic tests beginning 5 to 6 months prior to diagnosis, and most were diagnosed at an advanced stage (23% Stage IIIb and 46% Stage IV). The PPPM total health care costs in USD pre- and postdiagnosis were $2,407±$3,364 (mean±standard deviation) and $16,577±$33,550, respectively. PPPM total health care costs and utilization after lung cancer diagnosis were significantly higher among patients diagnosed at Stage IV disease and lowest among patients diagnosed at Stage I disease ($7,239 Stage I, $9,484 Stage II, $11,193 Stage IIIa, $17,415 Stage IIIb, and $21,441 Stage IV).

Conclusion

This study showed that most patients experienced long periods of delay between their first diagnostic test for lung cancer and a definitive diagnosis, and the majority were diagnosed at advanced stages of disease. Costs associated with the management of lung cancer increased substantially with higher stages at diagnosis. Procedures that diagnose lung cancer at earlier stages may allow for less resource use and costs among patients with lung cancer.