Impact of Race and Insurance Status on Primary Treatment for HPV-Associated Oropharyngeal Squamous Cell Carcinoma

The impact of distance to facility on treatment modality, short-term outcomes, and survival of patients with HPV-positive oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma

PURPOSE

This study compared treatment and outcomes for patients with HPV-positive oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma (OPSCC) based on their travel distance to treatment facility.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Patients with cT1-4, N0-3, M0 HPV-positive OPSCC in the National Cancer Database from 2010 to 2019 were identified and split into four quartiles based on distance to facility, with quartile 4 representing patients with furthest travel distances. Multivariable-adjusted logistic regression and Cox proportional hazards modeling were used to analyze the primary outcome of treatment received, and secondary outcomes of clinical stage, overall survival, surgical approach (i.e., TORS versus other), and 30-day surgical readmissions.

RESULTS

17,207 patients with HPV-positive OPSCC were evenly distributed into four quartiles. Compared to patients in quartile 1, patients in quartile 4 were 40 % less likely to receive radiation versus surgery (OR = 0.60; 95 % CI = 0.54-0.66). Among the patients who received surgery, quartile 4 had a higher odds of receiving TORS treatment compared to quartile 1 (4v1: OR = 2.38; 95 % CI = 2.05-2.77), quartile 2 (4v2: OR = 2.31, 95 % CI = 2.00-2.66), and quartile 3 (4v3: OR = 1.75; 95 % CI = 1.54-1.99). Quartile 4 had a decreased odds of mortality compared to Quartile 1 (4v1: OR = 0.87; 95 % CI = 0.79-0.97). There were no differences among the quartiles in presenting stage and 30-day readmissions.

CONCLUSIONS

This study found that patients with furthest travel distance to facility were more often treated surgically over non-surgical management, with TORS over open surgery, and had better overall survival. These findings highlight potential disparities in access to care for patients with HPV-positive OPSCC.

The Impact of Hospital Safety-Net Burden Status on Patients with HPV-Positive Oropharyngeal Cancer

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this study was to compare treatment characteristics and outcomes between patients with HPV-positive oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma (OPSCC) treated at hospitals of varying safety-net burden status.

METHODS

Patients with cT1-4, N0-3, M0 HPV-positive OPSCC who underwent definitive surgery or radiation were included. Patients were grouped based on their treating hospital safety-net burden status, defined as the percentage of uninsured and Medicaid-insured patients with OPSCC treated at the facility and stratified as low burden (LBH: 0-25th percentile), medium burden (MBH: 25th-75th percentile), or high burden (HBH: 75th-100th percentile). The primary outcome was primary treatment with surgery versus radiation, evaluated with multivariable-adjusted logistic regression. Secondary outcomes included TORS versus open surgical approach, and overall survival evaluated with Cox proportional hazards analysis.

RESULTS

Of the 19,810 patients with cT1-4, N0-3, M0 HPV-positive OPSCC included in this study, 4921 (24.8%) were treated at LBH, 12,201 (61.6%) were treated at MBH, and 2688 (13.6%) were treated at HBH. In multivariable-adjusted analysis, compared with treatment at LBH, treatment at HBH was associated with more frequent radiation over surgical treatment (OR: 1.26, 95% CI: 1.12-1.40, p < 0.001). For patients undergoing surgery, patients at HBH had less frequent transoral robotic surgery (OR: 0.30, 95% CI 0.24-0.38, p < 0.001) compared with patients treated at LBH. Overall survival of patients treated at HBH was worse than that of patients treated at LBH (HR: 1.27, 95% CI 1.13-1.43, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

These findings highlight underlying disparities at higher safety-net burden facilities that impact patterns of care and outcomes for patients with OPSCC.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

3 Laryngoscope, 134:1733-1740, 2024.

Racial Disparities in Head and Neck Cancer: It's Not Just About Access

OBJECTIVE

Medical literature identifies stark racial disparities in head and neck cancer (HNC) in the United States, primarily between non-Hispanic white (NHW) and non-Hispanic black (NHB) populations. The etiology of this disparity is often attributed to inequitable access to health care and socioeconomic status (SES). However, other contributors have been reported. We performed a systematic review to better understand the multifactorial landscape driving racial disparities in HNC.

DATA SOURCES

A systematic review was conducted in Covidence following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses Guidelines. A search of PubMed, SCOPUS, and CINAHL for literature published through November 2022 evaluating racial disparities in HNC identified 2309 publications.

REVIEW METHODS

Full texts were screened by 2 authors independently, and inconsistencies were resolved by consensus. Three hundred forty publications were ultimately selected and categorized into themes including disparities in access/SES, treatment, lifestyle, and biology. Racial groups examined included NHB and NHW patients but also included Hispanic, Native American, and Asian/Pacific Islander patients to a lesser extent.

RESULTS

Of the 340 articles, 192 focused on themes of access/SES, including access to high-quality hospitals, insurance coverage, and transportation contributing to disparate HNC outcomes. Additional themes discussed in 148 articles included incongruities in surgical recommendations, tobacco/alcohol use, human papillomavirus-associated malignancies, and race-informed silencing of tumor suppressor genes.

CONCLUSION

Differential access to care plays a significant role in racial disparities in HNC, disproportionately affecting NHB populations. However, there are other significant themes driving racial disparities. Future studies should focus on providing equitable access to care while also addressing these additional sources of disparities in HNC.

Differences in Receipt of Immunotherapy Treatment Among Patients With Head and Neck Cancer

Importance

The US Food and Drug Administration approved immune checkpoint inhibitors (immunotherapy) for select cases of head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) in 2016. However, it is unclear whether there are clinical or sociodemographic differences among patients receiving immunotherapy as part of their care. Given the known disparities in head and neck cancer care, we hypothesized that there are differences in receipt of immunotherapy among patients with HNSCC based on clinical and nonclinical characteristics.

Objective

To characterize clinical and nonclinical factors associated with receipt of immunotherapy among older patients with HNSCC.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This retrospective cohort study included patients 65 years or older diagnosed with HNSCC (n = 4860) in a community oncology care setting. Electronic health records from Navigating Cancer were assessed from January 1, 2017, to April 30, 2022.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Multivariable logistic regression was used to characterize clinical (tumor stage [localized vs advanced] and anatomical subsite [oropharyngeal vs nonoropharyngeal]) and nonclinical (age, smoking history, race and ethnicity, sex, and marital status) factors associated with receipt of immunotherapy.

Results

In the study cohort of 4860 patients, 3593 (73.9%) were men; 4230 (87.0%) were White and 630 (13.0%) were of other races. A total of 552 patients (11.4%) had received immunotherapy. After adjusting for covariates, in the final model, White patients with HNSCC had 80% increased odds of receiving immunotherapy (adjusted odds ratio [AOR], 1.80 [95% CI, 1.30-2.48]) compared with patients of other races. There were no statistically significant differences in the odds of receiving immunotherapy based on age, sex, or smoking history. Patients with nonoropharyngeal disease were significantly more likely to receive immunotherapy than those with oropharyngeal cancer (AOR, 1.29 [95% CI, 1.05-1.59]), as were those with advanced compared with local disease (AOR, 2.39 [95% CI, 1.71-3.34]).

Conclusions and Relevance

The findings of this cohort study suggest that among older patients with HNSCC, White patients may be more likely to receive immunotherapy as part of their care. Equitable access to immunotherapy and other treatment options will reduce cancer-related health disparities and improve survival of patients with HNSCC.

Racial disparities in surgical treatment of oropharyngeal cancer: A Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results review

OBJECTIVES

Oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma (OPSCC) has been rising. This manuscript looks to explore racial disparities in the surgical management of OPSCC.

METHODS

A cancer database was queried for patients with OPSCC diagnosed from 2004 to 2017. Univariate and multivariable logistic regressions were used to evaluate associations between patient race/ethnicity, surgical treatment, and reasons for lack of surgery.

RESULTS

37 306 (74.3%) patients did not undergo surgery, while 12 901 (25.7%) patients did. Non-Hispanic black (NHB) patients were less likely to undergo surgery than other races (17.9% vs. 26.5%; p < 0.0001). In clinical discussions, the Asian, Native American, Hawaiian, Pacific Islander (ANAHPI), and unknown race group was more likely to directly refuse surgery when recommended (2.5% vs. 1.5%; p = 0.015).

CONCLUSION

Racial differences exist in treatment for OPSCC. NHB patients are less likely to actually undergo surgical management for OPSCC, while other patients are more likely to directly "refuse" surgery outright when offered.

Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion in Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery: The Big Picture

Efforts are being made to achieve equitable health care for all, in addition to providing equal opportunity for those working within the health care system. Many challenges, however, still need to be overcome as research increasingly brings to light new areas of concern. In this commentary, we highlight recently published findings within the field of otolaryngology in the United States. These findings are then discussed within the context of global health care disparities to emphasize the importance of equitable health care on a global scale.

Health inequities in human papillomavirus prevention, diagnostics and clinical care in the USA: a scoping review

BACKGROUND

Human papillomavirus (HPV) represents the most common STI in the USA. HPV inequities in prevention, diagnostics and clinical care persist. We define inequities as systematic, avoidable and unfair differences in health outcomes.

OBJECTIVES

The objectives of this scoping review are to chart existing data on HPV-related inequities, identify gaps in existing literature and guide future research to reduce these inequities.

METHODS

We completed a scoping review following guidelines from the Joanna Briggs Institute and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses scoping reviews extension. We performed a literature search on PubMed and Ovid Embase in July 2022 for articles pertaining to HPV and evaluating populations within the USA. We included English language publications from 2018 to 2022 evaluating at least one health inequity outlined by the National Institutes of Health. General publication characteristics and health inequity data were charted in a masked, duplicate fashion using a pilot-tested Google Form. We analysed frequencies of health inequities and summarised main findings from included studies.

RESULTS

Our final sample included 170 publications. The most common inequities examined were race/ethnicity (140 studies), sex or gender (97 studies), and income (69 studies). Many historically marginalised racial/ethnic groups had lower rates of HPV-related knowledge, vaccination and worse overall outcomes related to HPV. Compared with women, men had lower rates of HPV vaccination and provider recommendation, and higher rates of HPV-infection. Results regarding income were largely conflicting.

CONCLUSION

Findings from our review demonstrate clear gaps in HPV-related inequity research. Vaccine completion, provider recommendation and intersectionality should continue to be evaluated to implement targeted interventions.