Catalyzing Navigation for Breast Cancer Survivorship (CaNBCS) in Safety-Net Settings: A Mixed Methods Study

Expanding the use of patient navigation: health coaching-based navigation as a novel approach to addressing deficits in breast cancer survivorship support

Patient navigation (PN) was created to address barriers to screening and workup for cancers. Since its inception it has resulted in improved mammography utilization, diagnostic resolution, and time to breast cancer treatment initiation in medically underserved populations. Because an abundance of evidence has established PN's positive impact, its use has expanded within the breast cancer care continuum, from screening, treatment, and ultimately survivorship. Increasing applications for navigation now also include support in the treatment and survivorship phase. After treatment, populations who struggle with the complex medical systems where oncology care is often delivered, also lack the support resources needed to successfully transition to survivorship. Support in the psychosocial realm is important for these patients as they continue surveillance and adherence to maintenance medications, such as hormonal therapy.

Patient navigation across the cancer care continuum: An overview of systematic reviews and emerging literature

Patient navigation is a strategy for overcoming barriers to reduce disparities and to improve access and outcomes. The aim of this umbrella review was to identify, critically appraise, synthesize, and present the best available evidence to inform policy and planning regarding patient navigation across the cancer continuum. Systematic reviews examining navigation in cancer care were identified in the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), PubMed, Embase, Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health (CINAHL), Epistemonikos, and Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) databases and in the gray literature from January 1, 2012, to April 19, 2022. Data were screened, extracted, and appraised independently by two authors. The JBI Critical Appraisal Checklist for Systematic Review and Research Syntheses was used for quality appraisal. Emerging literature up to May 25, 2022, was also explored to capture primary research published beyond the coverage of included systematic reviews. Of the 2062 unique records identified, 61 systematic reviews were included. Fifty-four reviews were quantitative or mixed-methods reviews, reporting on the effectiveness of cancer patient navigation, including 12 reviews reporting costs or cost-effectiveness outcomes. Seven qualitative reviews explored navigation needs, barriers, and experiences. In addition, 53 primary studies published since 2021 were included. Patient navigation is effective in improving participation in cancer screening and reducing the time from screening to diagnosis and from diagnosis to treatment initiation. Emerging evidence suggests that patient navigation improves quality of life and patient satisfaction with care in the survivorship phase and reduces hospital readmission in the active treatment and survivorship care phases. Palliative care data were extremely limited. Economic evaluations from the United States suggest the potential cost-effectiveness of navigation in screening programs.

Association of Race, Ethnicity, Insurance, and Language and Rate of Breast-Conserving Therapy Among Women With Nonmetastatic Breast Cancer at an Urban, Safety-Net Hospital

INTRODUCTION

Breast-conserving therapy (BCT), specifically breast-conserving surgery (BCS) and adjuvant radiation, provides an equivalent alternative to mastectomy for eligible patients. However, previous studies have shown that BCT is underused in the United States, particularly among marginalized demographic groups. In this study, we examine the association between race, ethnicity, insurance, and language and rate of BCS among patients treated at an academic, safety-net hospital.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We conducted a retrospective cohort study of 520 women with nonmetastatic breast cancer diagnosed and treated at an academic, safety-net hospital (2009-2014). We assessed eligibility for BCT and then differences in the rate of BCT among eligible patients by race, ethnicity, insurance, and language. Reasons for not undergoing BCT were documented.

RESULTS

Median age was 60 y; 55.9% were non-White, 31.9% were non-English-speaking, 15.6% were Hispanic, and 47.4% were Medicaid/uninsured. Three hundred seventy one (86.3%) underwent BCS; within this group, 324 (87.3%) completed adjuvant radiation. Among patients undergoing mastectomy, 30 patients (36.7%) were eligible for BCT; within this group, reasons for mastectomy included patient preference (n = 28) and to avoid possible re-excision or adjuvant radiation in patients with significant comorbidities (n = 2). Eligibility for BCT varied by ethnicity (Hispanic [100%], Non-Hispanic [92%], P = 0.02), but not race, language, or insurance. Among eligible patients, rate of BCS varied by age (<50 y [84.9%], ≥50 y [92.9%], P = 0.01) and ethnicity (Hispanic [98.5%], Non-Hispanic [91.3%], P = 0.04), but not race, language, or insurance.

CONCLUSIONS

At our safety-net hospital, the rate of BCS among eligible patients did not vary by race, language, or insurance. Excluding two highly comorbid patients, all patients who underwent mastectomy despite being eligible for BCT were counseled regarding BCS and expressed a preference for mastectomy. Further research is needed to understand the value of BCT in the treatment of breast cancer, to ensure informed decision-making, address potential misconceptions regarding BCT, and advance equitable care for all patients.