Reporting of Racial Health Disparities Research: Are We Making Progress?

Reducing racial and ethnic disparities in cardiovascular outcomes among cancer survivors

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Analyze current evidence on racial/ethnic disparities in cardiovascular outcomes among cancer survivors, identifying factors and proposing measures to address health inequities.

RECENT FINDINGS

Existing literature indicates that the Black population experiences worse cardiovascular outcomes following the diagnosis of both initial primary cancer and second primary cancer, with a notably higher prevalence of cardio-toxic events, particularly among breast cancer survivors. Contributing socioeconomic factors to these disparities include unfavorable social determinants of health, inadequate insurance coverage, and structural racism within the healthcare system. Additionally, proinflammatory epigenetic modification is hypothesized to be a contributing genetic variation factor. Addressing these disparities requires a multiperspective approach, encompassing efforts to address racial disparities and social determinants of health within the healthcare system, refine healthcare policies and access, and integrate historically stigmatized racial groups into clinical research. Racial and ethnic disparities persist in cardiovascular outcomes among cancer survivors, driven by multifactorial causes, predominantly associated with social determinants of health. Addressing these healthcare inequities is imperative, and timely efforts must be implemented to narrow the existing gap effectively.

The Health Disparities Research Industrial Complex

Research focused on health disparities-whether relating to one's race/ethnicity, gender expression, sexual orientation, citizenship status, income level, etc.-constitutes a large, generative, and highly profitable portion of scholarship in academic, clinical, and government settings. Health disparities research is expressed as a means of bringing greater attention to, and ultimately addressing via evidence-based implementation science, acts of devaluation and oppression that have continually contributed to these inequities. Philosophies underlying health disparities research's expansive and growing presence mirror the formal logic and ethos of the Military Industrial Complex and the Prison Industrial Complex. The "Health Disparities Research Industrial Complex," operationalized in this article, represents a novel mutation and extension of these complexes, primarily being enacted through these three mechanisms: 1) The construction and maintenance of beliefs, behaviors, and policies in healthcare, and society more broadly, that create and sustain disadvantages in minority health; 2) the creation and funding of research positions that inordinately provide non-minoritized people and those without relevant lived experiences the ability to study health disparities as "health equity tourists"; and 3) the production of health disparities research that, due to factors one and two, is incapable of fully addressing the disparities. In this piece, these and other core elements of the Health Disparities Research Industrial Complex, and the research bubble that it has produced, are discussed. Additionally, strategies for reducing the footprint and impact of the Health Disparities Research Industrial Complex and better facilitating opportunities for meaningful implementation in the field are presented.

Biological Basis of Breast Cancer-Related Disparities in Precision Oncology Era

Precision oncology is based on deep knowledge of the molecular profile of tumors, allowing for more accurate and personalized therapy for specific groups of patients who are different in disease susceptibility as well as treatment response. Thus, onco-breastomics is able to discover novel biomarkers that have been found to have racial and ethnic differences, among other types of disparities such as chronological or biological age-, sex/gender- or environmental-related ones. Usually, evidence suggests that breast cancer (BC) disparities are due to ethnicity, aging rate, socioeconomic position, environmental or chemical exposures, psycho-social stressors, comorbidities, Western lifestyle, poverty and rurality, or organizational and health care system factors or access. The aim of this review was to deepen the understanding of BC-related disparities, mainly from a biomedical perspective, which includes genomic-based differences, disparities in breast tumor biology and developmental biology, differences in breast tumors' immune and metabolic landscapes, ecological factors involved in these disparities as well as microbiomics- and metagenomics-based disparities in BC. We can conclude that onco-breastomics, in principle, based on genomics, proteomics, epigenomics, hormonomics, metabolomics and exposomics data, is able to characterize the multiple biological processes and molecular pathways involved in BC disparities, clarifying the differences in incidence, mortality and treatment response for different groups of BC patients.

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.

Machine Evaluation of Catchment Area Relevance through Text Mining

The University of Miami Sylvester Comprehensive Cancer Center Community Outreach and Engagement Office has developed an algorithm to aid in identifying catchment area relevant trials. We have developed this tool to capture a catchment area (South Florida) that represents the most racially, ethnically, and geographically diverse region in the US. Unfortunately, the area's tumor burden is also significant with many notable disparities, necessitating a prioritization of trials within Sylvester's catchment area. These trials address the needs of the population Sylvester serves by targeting cancers that are locally prevalent.

Insurance Authorization and Access to Proton Therapy for Patients With Head and Neck Cancers

PURPOSE

We evaluated our institutional experience to assess potential racial inequities in insurance coverage for proton therapy in patients with head and neck (HN) cancer.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

We examined the demographics of 1519 patients with HN cancer seen in consultation at our HN multidisciplinary clinic (HN MDC) and 805 patients for whom a proton insurance authorization was sought (PAS) from January 2020 to June 2022. The prospects for proton therapy insurance authorization were prospectively noted based on each patient's ICD-10 (International Classification of Diseases, 10th Revision) diagnosis code and their specific insurance plan. Proton-unfavorable (PU) insurance were those plans whose policy describes proton beam therapy as "experimental" or "not medically necessary" for the given diagnosis.

RESULTS

For patients seen in our HN MDC, Black, Indigenous, and people of color (BIPOC) were significantly more likely to have PU insurance than non-Hispanic White (NHW) patients (24.9% vs 18.4%, P = .005). In multivariable analysis including race, average income of residence ZIP code, and Medicare eligibility age, BIPOC patients had an odds ratio of 1.25 for PU insurance (P = .041). In the PAS cohort, while there was no difference in the percentage of patients receiving insurance approval for proton therapy between NHW and BIPOC populations (88% vs 88.2%, P = .80), for patients with PU insurance, the median time to determination was significantly longer (median, 15.5 days), and the median time to start any radiation of any modality was longer (46 vs 35 days, P = .08). Compared with NHW patients, the median time from consultation to start of radiation therapy was longer for BIPOC patients (37 vs 43 days, P = .01).

CONCLUSIONS

BIPOC patients were significantly more likely to have insurance plans unfavorable to proton therapy coverage. These PU insurance plans were associated with a longer median time to determination, a lower approval rate for proton therapy, and a longer time to start radiation of any modality.

Comprehensive genomic profiling and treatment patterns across ancestries in advanced prostate cancer: a large-scale retrospective analysis

BACKGROUND

Men of African ancestry experience the greatest burden of prostate cancer globally, but they are under-represented in genomic and precision medicine studies. Therefore, we sought to characterise the genomic landscape, comprehensive genomic profiling (CGP) utilisation patterns, and treatment patterns across ancestries in a large, diverse, advanced prostate cancer cohort, to determine the impact of genomics on ancestral disparities.

METHODS

In this large-scale retrospective analysis, the CGP-based genomic landscape was evaluated in biopsy sections from 11 741 patients with prostate cancer, with ancestry inferred using a single nucleotide polymorphism-based approach. Admixture-derived ancestry fractions for each patient were also interrogated. Independently, clinical and treatment information was retrospectively reviewed for 1234 patients in a de-identified US-based clinicogenomic database. Prevalence of gene alterations, including actionable gene alterations, was assessed across ancestries (n=11 741). Furthermore, real-world treatment patterns and overall survival was assessed in the subset of patients with linked clincogenomic information (n=1234).

FINDINGS

The CGP cohort included 1422 (12%) men of African ancestry and 9244 (79%) men of European ancestry; the clinicogenomic database cohort included 130 (11%) men of African ancestry and 1017 (82%) men of European ancestry. Men of African ancestry received more lines of therapy before CGP than men of European ancestry (median of two lines [IQR 0-8] vs one line [0-10], p=0·029). In genomic analyses, ancestry-specific mutational landscapes were observed, but the prevalence of alterations in AR, the DNA damage response pathway, and other actionable genes were similar across ancestries. Similar genomic landscapes were observed in analyses that accounted for admixture-derived ancestry fractions. After undergoing CGP, men of African ancestry were less likely to receive a clinical study drug compared with men of European ancestry (12 [10%] of 118 vs 246 [26%] of 938, p=0·0005).

INTERPRETATION

Similar rates of gene alterations with therapy implications suggest that differences in actionable genes (including AR and DNA damage response pathway genes) might not be a main driver of disparities across ancestries in advanced prostate cancer. Later CGP utilisation and a lower rate of clinical trial enrolment observed in men of African ancestry could affect genomics, outcomes, and disparities.

FUNDING

American Society for Radiation Oncology, Department of Defense, Flatiron Health, Foundation Medicine, Prostate Cancer Foundation, and Sylvester Comprehensive Cancer Center.

Racial and ethnic disparities in childhood and young adult acute lymphocytic leukaemia: secondary analyses of eight Children's Oncology Group cohort trials

BACKGROUND

Previous studies have identified racial and ethnic disparities in childhood acute lymphocytic leukaemia survival. We aimed to establish whether disparities persist in contemporaneous cohorts and, if present, are attributable to differences in leukaemia biology or insurance status.

METHODS

Patients with newly diagnosed acute lymphocytic leukaemia in inpatient and outpatient centres in the USA, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand, aged 0-30 years, who had race or ethnicity data available, enrolled on eight completed Children's Oncology Group trials (NCT00103285, NCT00075725, NCT00408005, NCT01190930, NCT02883049, NCT02112916, NCT02828358, and NCT00557193) were included in this secondary analysis. Race and ethnicity were categorised as non-Hispanic White, Hispanic, non-Hispanic Black, non-Hispanic Asian, and non-Hispanic other. Event-free survival and overall survival were compared across race and ethnicity groups. The relative contribution of clinical and biological disease prognosticators and insurance status was examined through multivariable regression models, both among the entire cohort and among those with B-cell lineage versus T-cell lineage disease.

FINDINGS

Between Jan 1, 2004, and Dec 31, 2019, 24 979 eligible children, adolescents, and young adults with acute lymphocytic leukaemia were enrolled, of which 21 152 had race or ethnicity data available. 11 849 (56·0%) were male and 9303 (44·0%) were female. Non-Hispanic White patients comprised the largest racial or ethnic group (13 872 [65·6%]), followed by Hispanic patients (4354 [20·6%]), non-Hispanic Black patients (1517 [7·2%]), non-Hispanic Asian (n=1071 [5·1%]), and non-Hispanic other (n=338 [1·6%]). 5-year event-free survival was 87·4% (95% CI 86·7-88·0%) among non-Hispanic White patients compared with 82·8% (81·4-84·1%; hazard ratio [HR] 1·37, 95% CI 1·26-1·49; p<0·0001) among Hispanic patients and 81·8% (79·3-84·0; HR 1·45, 1·28-1·65; p<0·0001) among non-Hispanic Black patients. Non-hispanic Asian patients had a 5-year event-free survival of 88·1% (95% CI 85·5-90·3%) and non-Hispanic other patients had a survival of 82·8% (76·4-87·6%). Inferior event-free survival among Hispanic patients was substantially attenuated by disease prognosticators and insurance status (HR decreased from 1·37 [1·26-1·49; p<0·0001] to 1·11 [1·00-1·22; p=0·045]). The increased risk among non-Hispanic Black patients was minimally attenuated (HR 1·45 [1·28-1·65; p<0·0001] to 1·32 [1·14-1·52; p<0·0001]). 5-year overall survival was 93·6% (91·5-95·1%) in non-Hispanic Asian patients, 93·3% (92·8-93·7%) in non-Hispanic White patients, 89·9% (88·7-90·9%) in Hispanic, 89·7% (87·6-91·4%) in non-Hispanic Black patients, 88·9% (83·2-92·7%) in non-Hispanic other patients. Disparities in overall survival were wider than event-free survival (eg, among non-Hispanic other patients, the HR for event-free survival was 1·43 [1·10-1·85] compared with 1·74 [1·27-2·40] for overall survival). Disparities were restricted to patients with B-cell acute lymphocytic leukaemia, no differences in event-free survival or overall survival were seen in the T-cell acute lymphocytic leukaemia group.

INTERPRETATION

Substantial disparities in outcome for B-cell acute lymphocytic leukaemia persist by race and ethnicity, but are not observed in T-cell acute lymphocytic leukaemia. Future studies of relapsed patients, access to and quality of care, and other potential aspects of structural racism are warranted to inform interventions aimed at dismantling racial and ethnic disparities.

FUNDING

National Cancer Institute and St Baldrick's Foundation.

Racial disparities in breast cancer treatment patterns and treatment related adverse events

The main objective of this work was to perform a comprehensive analysis and provide a race-stratified epidemiological report accounting for differences in treatment patterns and treatment related adverse events in Non-Hispanic women with breast cancer (BC). The cohort included women ≥ 18 years diagnosed with in-situ, early-stage, and late-stage BC (2005-2022). Treatment patterns included: surgery, breast radiation, chemotherapy, endocrine therapy, or biologic therapy. Treatment related adverse events were: chemotherapy complications, cardiovascular toxicities, immune-related adverse events, psychological affectations, or cognitive decline/dementia. The influence of race on the outcomes was measured via Cox proportional-hazards models. We included 17,454 patients (82% non-Hispanic Whites [NHW]). Most of the patients had a Charlson Comorbidity Score between 1 and 2 (68%), and TNM stage I (44.5%). Surgery was performed in 51.5% of the cases, while 30.6% received radiotherapy, 26.4% received chemotherapy, 3.1% received immunotherapy, and 41.2% received endocrine therapy. Non-Hispanic Blacks (NHB) had a lower probability of undergoing breast cancer surgery (aHR = 0.92, 95% CI 0.87-0.97) and of being prescribed endocrine therapy (aHR = 0.83, 95% CI 0.79-0.89), but a higher probability of receiving adjuvant radiotherapy (aHR = 1.40, 95% CI 1.29-1.52). Moreover, NHBs had lower risk of being diagnosed with psychological issues (aHR = 0.71, 95% CI 0.63-0.80) but a higher risk for cognitive decline/dementia (aHR = 1.30, 95% CI 1.08-1.56). In conclusion, NHB women diagnosed with BC were less likely than NHW to undergo curative intent surgery or receive endocrine therapy, and had a higher risk of cognitive decline/dementia after cancer treatment. Public policy measures are urgently needed which equalize access to quality healthcare for all patients and that promote a learning healthcare system which can improve cancer outcomes.

Evaluation of Social Determinants of Health and Prostate Cancer Outcomes Among Black and White Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

IMPORTANCE

As the field of medicine strives for equity in care, research showing the association of social determinants of health (SDOH) with poorer health care outcomes is needed to better inform quality improvement strategies.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the association of SDOH with prostate cancer-specific mortality (PCSM) and overall survival (OS) among Black and White patients with prostate cancer.

DATA SOURCES

A MEDLINE search was performed of prostate cancer comparative effectiveness research from January 1, 1960, to June 5, 2020.

STUDY SELECTION

Two authors independently selected studies conducted among patients within the United States and performed comparative outcome analysis between Black and White patients. Studies were required to report time-to-event outcomes. A total of 251 studies were identified for review.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

Three authors independently screened and extracted data. End point meta-analyses were performed using both fixed-effects and random-effects models. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) reporting guideline was followed, and 2 authors independently reviewed all steps. All conflicts were resolved by consensus.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

The primary outcome was PCSM, and the secondary outcome was OS. With the US Department of Health and Human Services Healthy People 2030 initiative, an SDOH scoring system was incorporated to evaluate the association of SDOH with the predefined end points. The covariables included in the scoring system were age, comorbidities, insurance status, income status, extent of disease, geography, standardized treatment, and equitable and harmonized insurance benefits. The scoring system was discretized into 3 categories: high (≥10 points), intermediate (5-9 points), and low (<5 points).

RESULTS

The 47 studies identified comprised 1 019 908 patients (176 028 Black men and 843 880 White men; median age, 66.4 years [IQR, 64.8-69.0 years]). The median follow-up was 66.0 months (IQR, 41.5-91.4 months). Pooled estimates found no statistically significant difference in PCSM for Black patients compared with White patients (hazard ratio [HR], 1.08 [95% CI, 0.99-1.19]; P = .08); results were similar for OS (HR, 1.01 [95% CI, 0.95-1.07]; P = .68). There was a significant race-SDOH interaction for both PCSM (regression coefficient, -0.041 [95% CI, -0.059 to 0.023]; P < .001) and OS (meta-regression coefficient, -0.017 [95% CI, -0.033 to -0.002]; P = .03). In studies with minimal accounting for SDOH (<5-point score), Black patients had significantly higher PCSM compared with White patients (HR, 1.29; 95% CI, 1.17-1.41; P < .001). In studies with greater accounting for SDOH variables (≥10-point score), PCSM was significantly lower among Black patients compared with White patients (HR, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.77-0.96; P = .02).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

The findings of this meta-analysis suggest that there is a significant interaction between race and SDOH with respect to PCSM and OS among men with prostate cancer. Incorporating SDOH variables into data collection and analyses are vital to developing strategies for achieving equity.

Inequities in Alliance Acute Leukemia Clinical Trial and Biobank Participation: Defining Targets for Intervention

PURPOSE

Representativeness in acute leukemia clinical research is essential for achieving health equity. The National Cancer Institute's mandate for Comprehensive Cancer Centers (CCCs) to define and assume responsibility for cancer control and treatment across a geographic catchment area provides an enforceable mechanism to target and potentially remediate participatory inequities.

METHODS

We examined enrollee characteristics across 15 Cancer and Leukemia Group B/Alliance cooperative group adult acute leukemia clinical trials (N = 3,734) from 1998 to 2013, including participation in optional companion biobanks. We determined enrollment odds by race-ethnicity for all participants adjusted for national incidence, and for those enrolled at CCCs adjusted for catchment area incidence. We modeled biobank participation by sociodemographics using logistic regression.

RESULTS

Non-Hispanic (NH)-White patients were more likely to be enrolled than NH-Black, NH-Asian, or Hispanic patients (odds ratio [OR], 0.75, 0.48, and 0.44, respectively; all P < .001), but less likely than NH-Native American patients (OR, 1.91; P < .001), adjusted for national incidence. Enrollment odds were lower for NH-Black, NH-Asian, and Hispanic patients at CCCs adjusted for catchment area incidence (OR, 0.57, 0.26, and 0.32, respectively; P < .001); differences were driven by overenrollment of NH-White patients from outside self-defined catchment areas (18.1% v 12.3%; χ2 P = .01) and by CCCs with less absolute enrollee diversity (rank sum P = .03). Among all enrollees, NH-White race-ethnicity and lower neighborhood deprivation correlated with biobank participation (OR, 1.81 and 1.45, respectively; P = .01 and .03). For CCC enrollees, the correlation of race-ethnicity with biobank participation was attenuated by a measure accounting for their site's degree of enrollment disparity but not neighborhood deprivation.

CONCLUSION

Acute leukemia clinical research disparities are substantial and driven by structural trial enrollment barriers at CCCs. Real-time CCC access and enrollment monitoring is needed to better align research participation with local populations.