Healthcare professionals' perspectives of barriers to cancer care delivery for American Indian, rural, and frontier populations

Objective

This descriptive qualitative study sought to understand the barriers affecting cancer care delivery from the perspective of healthcare professionals (HCPs) serving American Indian (AI), rural, and frontier populations.

Methods

One-on-one, semi-structured interviews with multidisciplinary HCPs (N = 18) who provide cancer care to AI, rural, and frontier populations were conducted between January and April 2022. Interviews were conducted via Zoom. Data were analyzed following thematic content analysis methodologies.

Results

Thematic content analysis revealed three major themes: (a) Access, (b) Time, and (c) Isolation. The themes represent the HCP perspectives of the needs and barriers of persons with cancer to whom they provide cancer care. Furthermore, these themes also reflect the barriers HCPs experience while providing cancer care to AI, rural and frontier populations.

Conclusions

This study provides preliminary evidence for the need and strong multidisciplinary support for an early palliative care intervention in rural and frontier South Dakota (SD). This intervention could support the needs of persons with advanced cancer as well as the HCPs delivering cancer care in rural settings.

Innovation

This study is the initial step to develop the first culturally responsive, nurse-led, early palliative care intervention for AI, rural, and frontier persons with advanced cancer in SD.

Understanding the impact of distance and disadvantage on lung cancer care and outcomes: a study protocol

BACKGROUND

Lung cancer is the third most common cancer in the UK and the leading cause of cancer mortality globally. NHS England guidance for optimum lung cancer care recommends management and treatment by a specialist team, with experts concentrated in one place, providing access to specialised diagnostic and treatment facilities. However, the complex and rapidly evolving diagnostic and treatment pathways for lung cancer, together with workforce limitations, make achieving this challenging. This place-based, behavioural science-informed qualitative study aims to explore how person-related characteristics interact with a person's location relative to specialist services to impact their engagement with the optimal lung pathway, and to compare and contrast experiences in rural, coastal, and urban communities. This study also aims to generate translatable evidence to inform the evidence-based design of a patient engagement intervention to improve lung cancer patients' and informal carers' participation in and experience of the lung cancer care pathway.

METHODS

A qualitative cross-sectional interview study with people diagnosed with lung cancer < 6 months before recruitment (in receipt of surgery, radical radiotherapy, or living with advanced disease) and their informal carers. Participants will be recruited purposively from Barts Health NHS Trust and United Lincolnshire Hospitals NHS Trusts to ensure a diverse sample across urban and rural settings. Semi-structured interviews will explore factors affecting individuals' capability, opportunity, and motivation to engage with their recommended diagnostic and treatment pathway. A framework approach, informed by the COM-B model, will be used to thematically analyse facilitators and barriers to patient engagement.

DISCUSSION

The study aligns with the current policy priority to ensure that people with cancer, no matter where they live, can access the best quality treatments and care. The evidence generated will be used to ensure that lung cancer services are developed to meet the needs of rural, coastal, and urban communities. The findings will inform the development of an intervention to support patient engagement with their recommended lung cancer pathway.

PROTOCOL REGISTRATION

The study received NHS Research Ethics Committee (Ref: 23/SC/0255) and NHS Health Research Authority (IRAS ID 328531) approval on 04/08/2023. The study was prospectively registered on Open Science Framework (16/10/2023; https://osf.io/njq48 ).

Investigating the role of county-level colorectal cancer screening rates on stage at diagnosis of colorectal cancer in rural Georgia

BACKGROUND

To examine the impact of county-level colorectal cancer (CRC) screening rates on stage at diagnosis of CRC and identify factors associated with stage at diagnosis across different levels of screening rates in rural Georgia.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective analysis utilizing data from 2004 to 2010 Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Program. The 2013 United States Department of Agriculture rural-urban continuum codes were used to identify rural Georgia counties. The 2004-2010 National Cancer Institute small area estimates for screening behaviors were applied to link county-level CRC screening rates. Descriptive statistics and multinominal logistic regressions were performed.

RESULTS

Among 4,839 CRC patients, most patients diagnosed with localized CRC lived in low screening areas; however, many diagnosed with regionalized and distant CRC lived in high screening areas (p-value = 0.009). In multivariable analysis, rural patients living in high screening areas were 1.2-fold more likely to be diagnosed at a regionalized and distant stage of CRC (both p-value < 0.05). When examining the factors associated with stage at presentation, Black patients who lived in low screening areas were 36% more likely to be diagnosed with distant diseases compared to White patients (95% CI, 1.08-1.71). Among those living in high screening areas, patients with right-sided CRC were 38% more likely to have regionalized disease (95% CI, 1.09-1.74).

CONCLUSION

Patients living in high screening areas were more likely to have a later stage of CRC in rural Georgia.

IMPACT

Allocating CRC screening/treatment resources and improving CRC risk awareness should be prioritized for rural patients in Georgia.

Differences in Rural Versus Urban Patients With Prostate Cancer in Diagnosis and Treatment: An Analysis of a Population-Based Cohort

PURPOSE

Patients living in rural communities have greater barriers to cancer care and poorer outcomes. We hypothesized that rural patients with prostate cancer have less access and receive different treatments compared with urban patients.

METHODS

We used a population-based prospective cohort, the North Carolina Prostate Cancer Comparative Effectiveness and Survivorship Study, to compare differences in prostate cancer diagnosis, access to care, and treatment in patients by geographic residence. The 2013 rural-urban continuum code (RUCC) was used to determine urban (RUCC 1-3) versus rural (RUCC 4-9) location of residence.

RESULTS

Patients with rural residence comprised 25% of the cohort (364 of 1,444); they were less likely to be White race and had lower income and educational attainment. Rural patients were more likely to have <12 cores on biopsy (47.1% v 35.7%; P < .001) and less likely (40.8% v 47.6%; P = .04) to receive multidisciplinary consultation. We observed significant differences in treatment between urban and rural patients, including rural patients receiving less active surveillance or observation (22.6% v 28.7%), especially in low-risk cancer (33.2% v 40.7%). On multivariable analysis that adjusted for patient and diagnostic factors, rural residence was associated with less use of active surveillance or observation over radical treatment (ie, surgery or radiation therapy; odds ratio, 0.49 v urban; P < .001) in patients with low-risk cancer.

CONCLUSION

Patients with prostate cancer who live in rural versus urban areas experience several differences in care that are likely clinically meaningful, including fewer cores in the diagnostic biopsy, less utilization of multidisciplinary consultation, less use of active surveillance, or observation for low-risk disease. Future studies are needed to assess the efficacy of interventions in mitigating these disparities.

The Impact of Social Determinants on Receipt of Adjuvant Radiation Nationally Following Atypical Meningioma Surgery

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to identify socioeconomic gaps in the administration of adjuvant radiotherapy (RT) for patients with atypical meningioma (AM) and secondarily to determine differences in survival between patients receiving radiation and those not receiving radiation at 12 and 60 months.

METHODS

The National Cancer Database was queried for patients receiving AM surgery between 2004 and 2019. Statistical analyses were performed to assess the association between receipt of adjuvant radiation and social determinants. Secondarily, Kaplan-Meir curves were used to compare overall patient survival between those that received radiation and those that did not.

RESULTS

Adjuvant radiation was less likely to be administered to patients over 65 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.53-22 0.77) and more likely to be administered to males (95% CI = 1.07-1.38). Compared to the Southern USA, patients were more likely to receive RT in the Northeastern (95% CI 24 = 1.40-2.05), Midwestern (95% CI = 1.06-1.54), and Western parts of the USA (95% 25 CI = 1.31-2.00). Patients residing furthest from their facility were less likely to receive radiation (95% CI = 0.65-0.98). Insured patients were more likely to receive radiation (P = 0.048) than uninsured patients. On multivariate analysis, no differences were found between racial groups regarding adjuvant radiation. For patients unstratified, radiation was shown to improve survival at 12 and 60 months.

CONCLUSIONS

Disparities exist in the administration of adjuvant RT for AM. Patients over 65, women, those residing in the Southern USA, those living further from their facilities and uninsured patients are less likely to receive radiation than their counterparts.

Models of survivorship care in patients with head and neck cancer in regional, rural, and remote areas: a systematic review

PURPOSE

Rural people with head and neck cancers (HNC) are likely to experience poorer health outcomes due to limited access to health services, so many benefit from models of care that account for rurality. The aim of this review was to synthesise literature on models of care in this population.

METHODS

Studies were identified using seven databases: PubMed, PsycINFO, Scopus, Embase, CINAHL, Medline, and Web of Science. Studies that tested or reported a model of care in rural HNC survivors were included. Data on characteristics and outcomes of the models were synthesised according to the domains in the Cancer Survivorship Care Quality Framework, and study quality was appraised.

RESULTS

Seventeen articles were included. Eight were randomised controlled trials (seven with a control group and one single-arm study). Three models were delivered online, nine via telehealth, and five in-person. Majority were led by nurses and allied health specialists and most addressed management of physical (n = 9) and psychosocial effects (n = 6), while only a few assessed implementation outcomes such as cost-effectiveness. None evaluated the management of chronic health conditions.

CONCLUSION

Positive outcomes were reported for domains of survivorship care that were measured; however, further evaluation of models of care for rural people with HNC is needed to assess effectiveness across all domains of care.

IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS

Rural cancer survivors are a diverse population with unique needs. Alternative models of care such as shared care, or models personalised to the individual, could be considered to reduce disparities in access to care and outcomes.

Survival Outcomes and Prognostic Factors in Therapy-Related Acute Myeloid Leukemia: A SEER Database Study, 2000-2020

INTRODUCTION

With advances in therapeutics and longer survival across different cancer spectrums, the incidence of therapy-related acute myeloid leukemia (tAML) has continued to rise. This study aims to evaluate the trend of survival outcomes and their association with sociodemographic factors in tAML over the last 20 years.

METHODS

We identified tAML patients between 2000 and 2020 from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database. Patients were divided into 4 age groups: 18-39, 40-59, 60-69, and >= 70 years, and 4 diagnostic periods: 2000-2005, 2006-2010, 2011-2015, and 2016-2020. Overall survival (OS) was compared using Kaplan Meier and log-rank methods.

RESULTS

The 1-year (and 5-year) OS in patients with tAML was 59.3% (33.7%), 48.2% (24.8%), 37.2% (11.1%), and 32.9% (5.5%) in age groups 18-39, 40-59, 60-69, and >=70 years, respectively. The 1-year (and 5-year) OS based on the year of diagnosis was 20.9% (13.2%), 36.8% (15.2%), 41.9% (13.88%), and 40.4% (not reached) for 2000-2005, 2006-2010, 2011-2015, and 2016-2020 respectively. Among the youngest cohort aged 18-39 years, 1-year OS was 35.7%, 57.7%, 66.7%, and 59.6%, respectively, in 4 diagnostic periods, whereas 1-year OS was 10.5%, 23.9%, 32.2%, and 36.9%, respectively, in the oldest cohort aged >=70 years. Age, year of diagnosis, and geographic location were independent prognostic markers of OS.

CONCLUSION

Our study demonstrates a significant improvement in the 1-year OS of tAML patients over the last decade, but the long-term prognosis remains dismal. Older patients continue to show improved survival in recent years with the addition of newer intensive and nonintensive options.

Real-world experience of immune checkpoint inhibitors in patients with solid tumours in the Top End of the Northern Territory, Australia from 2016 to 2021: a retrospective observational cohort study

BACKGROUND

Use of immune checkpoint inhibitors is growing, but clinical trial data may not apply to Indigenous patients or patients living in remote areas.

AIMS

To provide real-world incidence of immune-related adverse events (irAE) in the Top End of the Northern Territory and compare incidence between demographic subgroups.

METHODS

This retrospective, observational, cohort study collected data from electronic records of patients living in the Top End with solid organ cancer treated with immunotherapy between January 2016 and December 2021. The primary outcome was cumulative incidence of any-grade and severe irAE. Secondary outcomes were overall survival, treatment duration and reason for treatment discontinuation.

RESULTS

Two hundred and twenty-six patients received immunotherapy. Forty-eight (21%) lived in a remote or very remote area, and 36 (16%) were Indigenous. Cumulative incidence of any-grade irAE was 54% (122/226 patients); incidence of severe irAE was 26% (59/226 patients). Rates were similar between Indigenous and non-Indigenous patients of any-grade (42% vs 56%, P = 0.11) and severe (11% vs 18%, P = 0.29) irAE. However, Indigenous patients had shorter treatment duration, more frequently discontinued treatment due to patient preference and appeared to have shorter median overall survival than non-Indigenous patients (17.1 vs 30.4 months; hazard ratio (HR) = 1.5, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.92-2.66). There was no difference in mortality between remote and urban patients (median overall survival 27.5 vs 30.2 months; HR = 1.1, 95% CI = 0.7-1.7).

CONCLUSIONS

Rates of irAE in our cohort are comparable to those in the published literature. There was no significant difference in any-grade or severe irAE incidence observed between Indigenous and non-Indigenous patients.

The Association Between Oncology Outreach and Timely Treatment for Rural Patients with Breast Cancer: A Claims-Based Approach

BACKGROUND

Oncology outreach is a common strategy for increasing rural access to cancer care, where traveling oncologists commute across healthcare settings to extend specialized care. Examining the extent to which physician outreach is associated with timely treatment for rural patients is critical for informing outreach strategies.

METHODS

We identified a 100% fee-for-service sample of incident breast cancer patients from 2015 to 2020 Medicare claims and apportioned them into surgery and adjuvant therapy cohorts based on treatment history. We defined an outreach visit as the provision of care by a traveling oncologist at a clinic outside of their primary hospital service area. We used hierarchical logistic regression to examine the associations between patient receipt of preoperative care at an outreach visit (preoperative outreach) and > 60-day surgical delay, and patient receipt of postoperative care at an outreach visit (postoperative outreach) and > 60-day adjuvant delay.

RESULTS

We identified 30,337 rural-residing patients who received breast cancer surgery, of whom 4071 (13.4%) experienced surgical delay. Among surgical patients, 14,501 received adjuvant therapy, of whom 2943 (20.3%) experienced adjuvant delay. In adjusted analysis, we found that patient receipt of preoperative outreach was associated with reduced odds of surgical delay (odds ratio [OR] 0.75, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.61-0.91); however, we found no association between patient receipt of postoperative outreach and adjuvant delay (OR 1.04, 95% CI 0.85-1.25).

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings indicate that preoperative outreach is protective against surgical delay. The traveling oncologists who enable such outreach may play an integral role in catalyzing the coordination and timeliness of patient-centered care.

Evolution of community outreach and engagement at National Cancer Institute-Designated Cancer Centers, an evolving journey

Cancer mortality rates have declined during the last 28 years, but that process is not equitably shared. Disparities in cancer outcomes by race, ethnicity, socioeconomic status, sexual orientation and gender identity, and geographic location persist across the cancer care continuum. Consequently, community outreach and engagement (COE) efforts within National Cancer Institute-Designated Cancer Center (NCI-DCC) catchment areas have intensified during the last 10 years as has the emphasis on COE and catchment areas in NCI's Cancer Center Support Grant applications. This review article attempts to provide a historic perspective of COE within NCI-DCCs. Improving COE has long been an important initiative for the NCI, but it was not until 2012 and 2016 that NCI-DCCs were required to define their catchment areas rigorously and to provide specific descriptions of COE interventions, respectively. NCI-DCCs had previously lacked adequate focus on the inclusion of historically marginalized patients in cancer innovation efforts. Integrating COE efforts throughout the research and operational aspects of the cancer centers, at both the patient and community levels, will expand the footprint of COE efforts within NCI-DCCs. Achieving this change requires sustained commitment by the centers to adjust their activities and improve access and outcomes for historically marginalized communities.

Differences in cancer clinical trial activity and trial characteristics at metropolitan and rural trial sites in Victoria, Australia

OBJECTIVE

Cancer clinical trials (CCTs) provide access to emerging therapies and extra clinical care. We aimed to describe the volume and characteristics of CCTs available across Victoria, Australia, and identify factors associated with rural trial location.

METHODS

Quantitative analysis of secondary data from Cancer Council Victoria's Clinical Trials Management Scheme dataset.

DESIGN

A cross-sectional study design was used.

SETTING

CCTs were available Victoria-wide in 2018.

PARTICIPANTS

There were 1669 CCTs and 5909 CCT participants.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Rural CCT location was assessed as a binary variable with categories of 'yes' (modified Monash [MM] categories 2-7) and 'no' (MM category 1). MM categories were determined from postcodes. The highest ('least rural') MM category was used for postcodes with multiple MM categories.

RESULTS

Of 1669 CCTs, 168 (10.1%) were conducted in rural areas. Of 5909 CCT participants, 315 (5.3%) participated in rural CCTs. There were 526 CCTs (31.5%) with 1907 (32.3%) newly enrolled participants. Of 1892 newly enrolled participants with postcode data, 488 (25.8%) were rural residents. Of them, 368 (75.4%) participated in metropolitan CCTs. In a multivariable logistic regression analysis for all 1669 CCTs, odds of a rural rather than metropolitan CCT location were significantly (p-value <0.05) lower for early-phase than late-phase trials and non-solid than solid tumour trials but significantly (p-value <0.05) higher for non-industry than industry-sponsored trials.

CONCLUSIONS

In Victoria, 10% of CCTs are at rural sites. Most rural-residing CCT participants travel to metropolitan sites, where there are more late-phase, non-solid-tumour and industry-sponsored trials. Approaches to increase the volume and variety of rural CCTs should be considered.

African American and Hispanic Cancer Survivors' and Caregivers' Experiences in Nebraska

Racial and ethnic minority populations experience poorer cancer outcomes compared to non-Hispanic White populations, but qualitative studies have typically focused on single subpopulations. We explored experiences, perceptions, and attitudes toward cancer care services across the care continuum from screening through treatment among African American and Hispanic residents of Nebraska to identify unique needs for education, community outreach, and quality improvement. We conducted four focus groups (N = 19), April-August 2021 with people who were aged 30 or older and who self-identified as African American or Hispanic and as cancer survivors or caregivers. Sessions followed a structured facilitation guide, were audio recorded and transcribed, and were analyzed with a directed content analysis approach. Historical, cultural, and socioeconomic factors often led to delayed cancer care, such as general disuse of healthcare until symptoms were severe due to mistrust and cost of missing work. Obstacles to care included financial barriers, transportation, lack of support groups, and language-appropriate services (for Hispanic groups). Knowledge of cancer and cancer prevention varied widely; we identified a need for better community education about cancer within the urban Hispanic community. Participants had positive experiences and a sense of hope from the cancer care team. African American and Hispanic participants shared many similar perspectives about cancer care. Our results are being used in collaboration with national and regional cancer support organizations to expand their reach in communities of color, but structural and cultural barriers still need to be addressed.

Characterizing the Traveling Oncology Workforce and Its Influence on Patient Travel Burden: A Claims-Based Approach

PURPOSE

Oncology outreach is a common strategy for extending cancer care to rural patients. However, a nationwide characterization of the traveling workforce that enables this outreach is lacking, and the extent to which outreach reduces travel burden for rural patients is unknown.

METHODS

This cross-sectional study analyzed a rural (nonurban) subset of a 100% fee-for-service sample of 355,139 Medicare beneficiaries with incident breast, colorectal, and lung cancers. Surgical, medical, and radiation oncologists were linked to patients using Part B claims, and traveling oncologists were identified by observing hospital service area (HSA) transition patterns. We defined oncology outreach as the provision of cancer care by a traveling oncologist outside of their primary HSA. We used hierarchical gamma regression models to examine the separate associations between patient receipt of oncology outreach and one-way patient travel times to chemotherapy, radiotherapy, and surgery.

RESULTS

On average, 9,935 of 39,960 oncologists conducted annual outreach, where 57.8% traveled with low frequency (0-1 outreach visits/mo), 21.1% with medium frequency (1-3 outreach visits/mo), and 21.1% with high frequency (>3 outreach visits/mo). Oncologists provided surgery, radiotherapy, and chemotherapy to 51,715, 27,120, and 5,874 rural beneficiaries, respectively, of whom 2.5%, 6.9%, and 3.6% received oncology outreach. Rural patients who received oncology outreach traveled 16% (95% CI, 11 to 21) and 11% (95% CI, 9 to 13) less minutes to chemotherapy and radiotherapy than those who did not receive oncology outreach, corresponding to expected one-way savings of 15.9 (95% CI, 15.5 to 16.4) and 11.9 (95% CI, 11.7 to 12.2) minutes, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Our study introduces a novel claims-based approach for tracking the nationwide traveling oncology workforce and supports oncology outreach as an effective means for improving rural access to cancer care.

Antineoplastic Therapy Administration Safety Standards for Adult and Pediatric Oncology: ASCO-ONS Standards

PURPOSE

To update the ASCO-Oncology Nursing Society (ONS) standards for antineoplastic therapy administration safety in adult and pediatric oncology and highlight current standards for antineoplastic therapy for adult and pediatric populations with various routes of administration and location.

METHODS

ASCO and ONS convened a multidisciplinary Expert Panel with representation of multiple organizations to conduct literature reviews and add to the standards as needed. The evidence base was combined with the opinion of the ASCO-ONS Expert Panel to develop antineoplastic safety standards and guidance. Public comments were solicited and considered in preparation of the final manuscript.

RESULTS

The standards presented here include clarification and expansion of existing standards to include home administration and other changes in processes of ordering, preparing, and administering antineoplastic therapy; the advent of immune effector cellular therapy; the importance of social determinants of health; fertility preservation; and pregnancy avoidance. In addition, the standards have added a fourth verification.

STANDARDS

Standards are provided for which health care organizations and those involved in all aspects of patient care can safely deliver antineoplastic therapy, increase the quality of care, and reduce medical errors.Additional information is available at www.asco.org/standards and www.ons.org/onf.

Facilitators and barriers of HPV vaccination: a qualitative study in rural Georgia

INTRODUCTION

Human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination protects against HPV-associated cancers and genital warts. Healthy People 2030 goal for HPV vaccine uptake is 80%, but as of 2021, only 58.5% of adolescents are up to date in Georgia. The purpose of the study is to assess the attitudes, vaccine practices, facilitators, and barriers to receiving the HPV vaccine in southwest Georgia.

METHODS

We conducted 40 semi-structured interviews in the United States from May 2020-Feburary 2022 with three different audiences (young adults, parents, and providers and public health professionals) guided by the P3 (patient-, provider-, practice-levels) Model. The audiences were recruited by multiple methods including fliers, a community advisory board, Facebook ads, phone calls or emails to schools and health systems, and snowball sampling. Young adults and parents were interviewed to assess their perceived benefits, barriers, and susceptibility of the HPV vaccine. Providers and public health professionals were interviewed about facilitators and barriers of patients receiving the HPV vaccine in their communities. We used deductive coding approach using a structured codebook, two coders, analyses in MAXQDA, and matrices.

RESULTS

Out of the 40 interviews: 10 young adults, 20 parents, and 10 providers and public health professionals were interviewed. Emerging facilitator themes to increase the uptake of the HPV vaccine included existing knowledge (patient level) and community outreach, providers' approach to the HPV vaccine recommendations and use of educational materials in addition to counseling parents or young adults (provider level) and immunization reminders (practice level). Barrier themes were lack of knowledge around HPV and the HPV vaccine (patient level), need for strong provider recommendation and discussing the vaccine with patients (provider level), and limited patient reminders and health education information around HPV vaccination (practice level). Related to socio-ecology, the lack of transportation and culture of limited discussion about vaccination in rural communities and the lack of policies facilitating the uptake of the HPV vaccine (e.g., school mandates) were described as challenges.

CONCLUSION

These interviews revealed key themes around education, knowledge, importance of immunization reminders, and approaches to increasing the HPV vaccination in rural Georgia. This data can inform future interventions across all levels (patient, provider, practice, policy, etc.) to increase HPV vaccination rates in rural communities.

Human papillomavirus circulating tumor DNA assays as a mechanism for head and neck cancer equity in rural regions of the United States

The rates of human papillomavirus-positive oropharyngeal cancer (HPV-OPC) are rising worldwide and in the United States, particularly in rural regions including Appalachia. Rural areas face unique health challenges resulting in higher cancer incidence and mortality rates, and this includes HPV-OPC. The recent advent of highly sensitive liquid biopsies for the non-invasive detection of HPV-OPC recurrence (circulating tumor HPV DNA, HPV ctDNA) has been swiftly adopted as part of surveillance paradigms. Though knowledge gaps persist regarding its use and clinical trials are ongoing, the ease of collection and cost-effectiveness of HPV ctDNA make it more accessible for HPV-OPC survivors than usual surveillance methods of frequent exams and imaging. Herein, we discuss how implementing HPV ctDNA assays in rural regions of the United States provide one poignant example of how liquid biopsies can improve cancer care equity.

Analysis and Optimization of Equitable US Cancer Clinical Trial Center Access by Travel Time

Importance

Racially minoritized and socioeconomically disadvantaged populations are currently underrepresented in clinical trials. Data-driven, quantitative analyses and strategies are required to help address this inequity.

Objective

To systematically analyze the geographical distribution of self-identified racial and socioeconomic demographics within commuting distance to cancer clinical trial centers and other hospitals in the US.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This longitudinal quantitative study used data from the US Census 2020 Decennial and American community survey (which collects data from all US residents), OpenStreetMap, National Cancer Institute-designated Cancer Centers list, Nature Index of Cancer Research Health Institutions, National Trial registry, and National Homeland Infrastructure Foundation-Level Data. Statistical analyses were performed on data collected between 2006 and 2020.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Population distributions of socioeconomic deprivation indices and self-identified race within 30-, 60-, and 120-minute 1-way driving commute times from US cancer trial sites. Map overlay of high deprivation index and high diversity areas with existing hospitals, existing major cancer trial centers, and commuting distance to the closest cancer trial center.

Results

The 78 major US cancer trial centers that are involved in 94% of all US cancer trials and included in this study were found to be located in areas with socioeconomically more affluent populations with higher proportions of self-identified White individuals (+10.1% unpaired mean difference; 95% CI, +6.8% to +13.7%) compared with the national average. The top 10th percentile of all US hospitals has catchment populations with a range of absolute sum difference from 2.4% to 35% from one-third each of Asian/multiracial/other (Asian alone, American Indian or Alaska Native alone, Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander alone, some other race alone, population of 2 or more races), Black or African American, and White populations. Currently available data are sufficient to identify diverse census tracks within preset commuting times (30, 60, or 120 minutes) from all hospitals in the US (N = 7623). Maps are presented for each US city above 500 000 inhabitants, which display all prospective hospitals and major cancer trial sites within commutable distance to racially diverse and socioeconomically disadvantaged populations.

Conclusion and Relevance

This study identified biases in the sociodemographics of populations living within commuting distance to US-based cancer trial sites and enables the determination of more equitably commutable prospective satellite hospital sites that could be mobilized for enhanced racial and socioeconomic representation in clinical trials. The maps generated in this work may inform the design of future clinical trials or investigations in enrollment and retention strategies for clinical trials; however, other recruitment barriers still need to be addressed to ensure racial and socioeconomic demographics within the geographical vicinity of a clinical site can translate to equitable trial participant representation.

How far is too far? Cancer prevention and clinical trial enrollment in geographically underserved patient populations

Despite dedicated efforts to improve equitable access to cancer care in the United States, disparities in cancer outcomes persist, and geographically underserved patients remain at an increased risk of cancer with lower rates of survival. The critical evaluation of cancer prevention inequities and clinical trial access presents the opportunity to outline novel strategies to incrementally improve bookended access to gynecologic cancer care for geographically underserved patients. Cancer prevention strategies that can be addressed in the rural patient population mirror priorities in the Healthy People 2030 objectives and include increased identification of high risk individuals who may benefit from increased cancer screening and risk reduction, increasing the proportion of people who discuss interventions to prevent cancer, such as HPV vaccination, with their provider, and increasing the proportion of adults who complete evidence based cancer screening. Barriers to accrual to clinical trials for rural patients overlap significantly with the same barriers to obtaining health care in general. These barriers include: lack of facilities and specialized providers; lack of robust health infrastructure; inability to travel; and financial barriers. In this review, we will discuss current knowledge and opportunities to improve cancer prevention initiatives and clinical trial enrollment in geographically underserved populations with a focus on rurality.

Cancer care coordination in rural Hawaii: a focus group study

BACKGROUND

Rural populations consistently experience a disproportionate burden of cancer, including higher incidence and mortality rates, compared to the urban populations. Factors that are thought to contribute to these disparities include limited or lack of access to care and challenges with care coordination (CC). In Hawaii, many patients residing in rural areas experience unique challenges with CC as they require inter-island travel for their cancer treatment. In this focus group study, we explored the specific challenges and positive experiences that impact the CC in rural Hawaii cancer patients.

METHODS

We conducted two semi-structured focus group interviews with cancer patients receiving active treatment for any type of cancer (n = 8). The participants were recruited from the rural areas of Hawaii, specifically the Hawaii county and Kauai. Rural was defined using the Rural-Urban Commuting Area Codes (RUCA; rural ≥ 4). The focus group discussions were facilitated using open-ended questions to explore patients' experiences with CC.

RESULTS

Content analysis revealed that 47% of the discussions were related to CC-related challenges, including access to care (27.3%), insurance (9.1%), inter-island travel (6.1%), and medical literacy (4.5%). Other major themes from the discussions focused on facilitators of CC (30.3%), including the use of electronic patient portal (12.1%), team-based approach (9.1%), family caregiver support (4.5%), and local clinic staff (4.5%).

CONCLUSION

Our findings indicate that there are notable challenges in rural patients' experiences regarding their cancer care coordination. Specific factors such as the lack of oncologist and oncology services, fragmented system, and the lack of local general medical providers contribute to problems with access to care. However, there are also positive factors found through the help of facilitators of CC, notability the use of electronic patient portal, team-based approach, family caregiver support, and local clinic staff. These findings highlight potential targets of interventions to improve cancer care delivery for rural patients.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Not required.

Addressing the Spectrum of Opioid Misuse Prevention, Treatment, and Recovery in Rural Washington State Communities: Provider Identified Barriers and Needs

The opioid overdose epidemic has significantly impacted rural communities. Rural settings present unique challenges to addressing opioid misuse. The purpose of the current study was to understand the similarities and differences between rural and urban-based providers serving rural communities. Washington state-based opioid-related service providers who serve rural communities (N = 75) completed an online survey between July and September 2020. Chi-square tests of association were used to examine significant differences in proportions between rural providers and rural-serving urban providers across opioid prevention, treatment, and recovery training topics. Rural providers reported receiving significantly less opioid treatment and recovery training on the criminal legal system, workplace-based education on treatment and recovery, and co-occurring disorder treatment; and significantly higher prior opioid prevention training on the prevention programs for youth and accessing prevention funding. Differences between rural and rural-serving urban providers demonstrate ways in which rural-urban partnerships can be strengthened to enhance public health.

Significance of Social Determinants of Health in Tumor Presentation, Hospital Readmission, and Overall Survival in Ocular Oncology

PURPOSE

To evaluate the association between social determinants of health (SDH) with presentation and outcomes in patients with ocular cancer.

METHODS

The National Cancer Database was queried for primary clinical tumor (cT) classifications of T1 to T4 N0M0 uveal melanoma, conjunctival melanoma, or retinoblastoma diagnosed between January 2006 and December 2017. Pearson χ2 analysis assessed differences in SDH-related characteristics between cancer cohorts. Binary logistic regression with adjusted odds ratios (aORs) and multivariate Cox proportional hazards ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were performed.

DESIGN

Cross-sectional with a nationally representative sample.

RESULTS

Three thousand nine hundred sixty-eight uveal melanoma cases, 352 conjunctival melanoma cases, and 480 retinoblastoma cases were included. Differences in race, primary payer status, income quartile, population density, facility location, Charlson-Deyo comorbidity score, history of malignancy, cT classification at presentation, surgical treatment, radiotherapy, chemotherapy, 30-day readmission, and overall survival (OS) were observed among the cancers. Female sex (aOR 0.819 [95% CI 0.689-0.973]) and top income quartile (aOR 0.691 [95% CI 0.525-0.908]) had decreased likelihood of advanced cT classification at presentation. No insurance (aOR 1.736 [95% CI 1.159-2.601]) and Medicaid primary payer status (aOR 1.875 [95% CI 1.323-2.656]) had increased likelihood of advanced cT classification. Patients in rural areas (aOR 7.157 [95% CI 1.875-27.320]) were more likely to be readmitted within 30 days after initial treatment. Increased age was associated with decreased 5-year OS (HR 1.040 [95% CI 1.033-1.047]).

CONCLUSIONS

SDH may influence advanced cT classification at presentation and 30-day readmission compared with OS in patients with ocular cancer, highlighting the need for ophthalmologists and public health efforts to address disparities in SDH.

Employment-related Education and Support for Cancer Survivors: a Content Analysis of Employment Resources Offered on National Cancer Institute-Designated Cancer Center Websites

High rates of employment changes and associated concerns among cancer survivors following diagnosis and treatment suggest a need to examine what employment-related educational resources and support are currently being offered to cancer survivors and what gaps exist in those resources. In 2023, we conducted a content analysis of employment resources described on the websites of the NCI-Designated Cancer Centers that provide clinical care (N = 64) through a systematic review procedure using predetermined search terms and a standardized process to examine the availability and accessibility of such resources. Descriptive analyses were conducted to characterize the employment resources identified. In total, 175 employment resources were identified across 49 cancer center websites; 102 (58%) provided patient-facing education/information, 58 (33%) offered a consultation, 14 (8%) offered support groups/classes, and 1 (1%) was classified as "Other." Most (76%) resources were provided internally by the cancer center, and often, more than one discipline was involved, most commonly social work and medicine. These findings are encouraging as they suggest that most (77%) NCI-Designated Cancer Centers recognize employment support as a component of survivorship care. The multidisciplinary nature of the resources identified is supported by moderate evidence that multidisciplinary interventions appear to have the greatest potential to foster a return to work for cancer survivors and align with suggestions made by recent expert groups and guidelines regarding employment support for cancer survivors. Ongoing work is needed to assess the utilization, impact, and equity of available employment resources to optimize work outcomes among cancer survivors.

Genome-matched treatments and patient outcomes in the Maine Cancer Genomics Initiative (MCGI)

Genomic tumor testing (GTT) is an emerging technology aimed at identifying variants in tumors that can be targeted with genomically matched drugs. Due to limited resources, rural patients receiving care in community oncology settings may be less likely to benefit from GTT. We analyzed GTT results and observational clinical outcomes data from patients enrolled in the Maine Cancer Genomics Initiative (MCGI), which provided access to GTTs; clinician educational resources; and genomic tumor boards in community practices in a predominantly rural state. 1603 adult cancer patients completed enrollment; 1258 had at least one potentially actionable variant identified. 206 (16.4%) patients received a total of 240 genome matched treatments, of those treatments, 64% were FDA-approved in the tumor type, 27% FDA-approved in a different tumor type and 9% were given on a clinical trial. Using Inverse Probability of Treatment Weighting to adjust for baseline characteristics, a Cox proportional hazards model demonstrated that patients who received genome matched treatment were 31% less likely to die within 1 year compared to those who did not receive genome matched treatment (HR: 0.69; 95% CI: 0.52-0.90; p-value: 0.006). Overall, GTT through this initiative resulted in levels of genome matched treatment that were similar to other initiatives, however, clinical trials represented a smaller share of treatments than previously reported, and "off-label" treatments represented a greater share. Although this was an observational study, we found evidence for a potential 1-year survival benefit for patients who received genome matched treatments. These findings suggest that when disseminated and implemented with a supportive infrastructure, GTT may benefit cancer patients in rural community oncology settings, with further work remaining on providing genome-matched clinical trials.

Facilitators and barriers of HPV vaccination: a qualitative study in rural Georgia

Introduction

Human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination protects against HPV-associated cancers and genital warts. Healthy People 2030 goal for HPV vaccine uptake is 80%, but as of 2021, only 58.5% of adolescents are up to date in Georgia. The purpose of the study is to assess the attitudes, vaccine practices, facilitators, and barriers to receiving the HPV vaccine in southwest Georgia.

Methods

We conducted 40 semi-structured interviews with three different audiences (young adults, parents, and providers and public health professionals) guided by the P3 (patient-, provider-, practice-levels) model and used deductive coding approach. Young adults and parents were interviewed to assess their perceived benefits, barriers, and susceptibility of the HPV vaccine. Providers and public health professionals were interviewed about facilitators and barriers of patients receiving the HPV vaccine in their communities.

Results

Out of the 40 interviews: 10 young adults, 20 parents, and 10 providers and public health professionals were interviewed. Emerging facilitator themes to increase the uptake of the HPV vaccine included existing knowledge (patient level), providers' approach to the HPV vaccine recommendations (provider level) and immunization reminders (practice level). Barrier themes were lack of knowledge around HPV and the HPV vaccine (patient level), need for strong provider recommendation and discussing the vaccine with patients (provider level), and limited patient reminders and information (practice level).

Conclusions

These interviews revealed key themes around education, knowledge, importance of immunization reminders, and approaches to increasing the HPV vaccination in rural Georgia. This data can inform future interventions across all levels (patient, provider, practice, policy, etc.) to increase HPV vaccination rates in rural communities.

American Cancer Society's report on the status of cancer disparities in the United States, 2023

In 2021, the American Cancer Society published its first biennial report on the status of cancer disparities in the United States. In this second report, the authors provide updated data on racial, ethnic, socioeconomic (educational attainment as a marker), and geographic (metropolitan status) disparities in cancer occurrence and outcomes and contributing factors to these disparities in the country. The authors also review programs that have reduced cancer disparities and provide policy recommendations to further mitigate these inequalities. There are substantial variations in risk factors, stage at diagnosis, receipt of care, survival, and mortality for many cancers by race/ethnicity, educational attainment, and metropolitan status. During 2016 through 2020, Black and American Indian/Alaska Native people continued to bear a disproportionately higher burden of cancer deaths, both overall and from major cancers. By educational attainment, overall cancer mortality rates were about 1.6-2.8 times higher in individuals with ≤12 years of education than in those with ≥16 years of education among Black and White men and women. These disparities by educational attainment within each race were considerably larger than the Black-White disparities in overall cancer mortality within each educational attainment, ranging from 1.03 to 1.5 times higher among Black people, suggesting a major role for socioeconomic status disparities in racial disparities in cancer mortality given the disproportionally larger representation of Black people in lower socioeconomic status groups. Of note, the largest Black-White disparities in overall cancer mortality were among those who had ≥16 years of education. By area of residence, mortality from all cancer and from leading causes of cancer death were substantially higher in nonmetropolitan areas than in large metropolitan areas. For colorectal cancer, for example, mortality rates in nonmetropolitan areas versus large metropolitan areas were 23% higher among males and 21% higher among females. By age group, the racial and geographic disparities in cancer mortality were greater among individuals younger than 65 years than among those aged 65 years and older. Many of the observed racial, socioeconomic, and geographic disparities in cancer mortality align with disparities in exposure to risk factors and access to cancer prevention, early detection, and treatment, which are largely rooted in fundamental inequities in social determinants of health. Equitable policies at all levels of government, broad interdisciplinary engagement to address these inequities, and equitable implementation of evidence-based interventions, such as increasing health insurance coverage, are needed to reduce cancer disparities.

Implementing the European code of cancer practice in rural settings

Existing evidence often indicates higher cancer incidence and mortality rates, later diagnosis, lower screening uptake and poorer long-term survival for people living in rural compared to more urbanised areas. Despite wide inequities and variation in cancer care and outcomes across Europe, much of the scientific literature explicitly exploring the impact of rurality on cancer continues to come from Australia and North America. The European Code of Cancer Practice or "The Code" is a citizen and patient-centred statement of the most salient requirements for good clinical cancer practice and has been extensively co-produced by cancer patients, cancer professionals and patient advocates. It contains 10 key overarching Rights that a cancer patient should expect from their healthcare system, regardless of where they live and has been strongly endorsed by professional and patient cancer organisations as well as the European Commission. In this article, we use these 10 fundamental Rights as a framework to argue that (i) the issues and needs identified in The Code are generally more profound for rural people with cancer; (ii) addressing these issues is also more challenging in rural contexts; (iii) interventions and support must explicitly account for the unique needs of rural residents living with and affected by cancer and (iv) new innovative approaches are urgently required to successfully overcome the challenges faced by rural people with cancer and their caregivers. Despite equitable healthcare being a key European policy focus, the needs of rural people living with cancer have largely been neglected.

Epidemiology of childhood acute leukemias in marginalized populations of the central-south region of Mexico: results from a population-based registry

Introduction

Acute leukemias (AL) are the main types of cancer in children worldwide. In Mexico, they represent one of the main causes of death in children under 20 years of age. Most of the studies on the incidence of AL in Mexico have been developed in the urban context of Greater Mexico City and no previous studies have been conducted in the central-south of the country through a population-based study. The aim of the present work was to identify the general and specific incidence rates of pediatric AL in three states of the south-central region of Mexico considered as some of the marginalized populations of Mexico (Puebla, Tlaxcala, and Oaxaca).

Methods

A population-based study was conducted. Children aged less than 20 years, resident in these states, and newly diagnosed with AL in public/private hospitals during the period 2021-2022 were identified. Crude incidence rates (cIR), standardized incidence rates (ASIRw), and incidence rates by state subregions (ASIRsr) were calculated. Rates were calculated using the direct and indirect method and reported per million children under 20 years of age. In addition, specific rates were calculated by age group, sex, leukemia subtype, and immunophenotype.

Results

A total of 388 cases with AL were registered. In the three states, the ASIRw for AL was 51.5 cases per million (0-14 years); in Puebla, it was 53.2, Tlaxcala 54.7, and Oaxaca de 47.7. In the age group between 0-19 years, the ASIRw were 44.3, 46.4, 48.2, and 49.6, in Puebla, Tlaxcala, and Oaxaca, respectively. B-cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia was the most common subtype across the three states.

Conclusion

The incidence of childhood AL in the central-south region of Mexico is within the range of rates reported in other populations of Latin American origin. Two incidence peaks were identified for lymphoblastic and myeloid leukemias. In addition, differences in the incidence of the disease were observed among state subregions which could be attributed to social factors linked to the ethnic origin of the inhabitants. Nonetheless, this hypothesis requires further investigation.

Material financial hardship and insurance-related experiences among Utah's rural and urban cancer survivors

PURPOSE

Describe material financial hardship (e.g., using savings, credit card debt), insurance, and access to care experienced by Utah cancer survivors; investigate urban-rural differences in financial hardship.

METHODS

Cancer survivors were surveyed from 2018 to 2021 about their experiences with financial hardship, access to healthcare, and job lock (insurance preventing employment changes). Weighed percentage responses, univariable and multivariable logistic regression models for these outcomes compared differences in survivors living in rural and urban areas based on Rural-Urban Commuting Area Codes.

RESULTS

The N = 1793 participants were predominantly Non-Hispanic White, female, and 65 or older at time of survey. More urban than rural survivors had a college degree (39.8% vs. 31.0%, p = 0.04). Overall, 35% of survivors experienced ≥ 1 financial hardship. In adjusted analyses, no differences were observed between urban and rural survivors for: material financial hardship, the overall amount of hardship reported, insurance status at survey, access to healthcare, or job lock. Hispanic rural survivors were less likely to report financial hardship than Hispanic urban survivors (odds ratio (OR) = 0.24, 95%CI = 0.08-0.73)). Rural survivors who received chemo/immune therapy as their only treatment were more likely to report at least one instance of financial hardship than urban survivors (OR = 2.72, 95%CI = 1.08-6.86).

CONCLUSIONS

The relationship between rurality and financial hardship among survivors may be most burdensome for patients whose treatments require travel or specialty medication access.

IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS

The impact of living rurally on financial difficulties after cancer diagnoses is complex. Features of rurality that may alter financial difficulty after a cancer diagnosis may vary geographically and instead of considering rurality as a stand-alone factor, these features should be investigated independently.

Measure Twice, Change Once: Using Simulation to Support Change Management in Rural Healthcare Delivery

Barriers to adequate healthcare in rural areas remain a grand challenge for local healthcare systems. In addition to patients' travel burdens, lack of health insurance, and lower health literacy, rural healthcare systems also experience significant resource shortages, as well as issues with recruitment and retention of healthcare providers, particularly specialists. These factors combined result in complex change management-focused challenges for rural healthcare systems. Change management initiatives are often resource intensive, and in rural health organizations already strapped for resources, it may be particularly risky to embark on change initiatives. One way to address these change management concerns is by leveraging socio-technical simulation models to estimate techno-economic feasibility (e.g., is it technologically feasible, and is it economical?) as well as socio-utility feasibility (e.g., how will the changes be utilized?). We present a framework for how healthcare systems can integrate modeling and simulation techniques from systems engineering into a change management process. Modeling and simulation are particularly useful for investigating the amount of uncertainty about potential outcomes, guiding decision-making that considers different scenarios, and validating theories to determine if they accurately reflect real-life processes. The results of these simulations can be integrated into critical change management recommendations related to developing readiness for change and addressing resistance to change. As part of our integration, we present a case study showcasing how simulation modeling has been used to determine feasibility and potential resistance to change considerations for implementing a mobile radiation oncology unit. Recommendations and implications are discussed.

A systematic review on the qualitative experiences of people living with lung cancer in rural areas

PURPOSE

To synthesize the qualitative literature exploring the experiences of people living with lung cancer in rural areas.

METHODS

Searches were performed in MEDLINE, CINAHL, and PsycINFO. Articles were screened independently by two reviewers against pre-determined eligibility criteria. Data were synthesized using Thomas and Harden's framework for the thematic synthesis of qualitative research. The CASP qualitative checklist was used for quality assessment and the review was reported in accordance with the ENTREQ and PRISMA checklists.

RESULTS

Nine articles were included, from which five themes were identified: (1) diagnosis and treatment pathways, (2) travel and financial burden, (3) communication and information, (4) experiences of interacting with healthcare professionals, (5) symptoms and health-seeking behaviors. Lung cancer diagnosis was unexpected for some with several reporting treatment delays and long wait times regarding diagnosis and treatment. Accessing treatment was perceived as challenging and time-consuming due to distance and financial stress. Inadequate communication of information from healthcare professionals was a common concern expressed by rural people living with lung cancer who also conveyed dissatisfaction with their healthcare professionals. Some were reluctant to seek help due to geographical distance and sociocultural factors whilst others found it challenging to identify symptoms due to comorbidities.

CONCLUSIONS

This review provides a deeper understanding of the challenges faced by people with lung cancer in rural settings, through which future researchers can begin to develop tailored support to address the existing disparities that affect this population.

Identifying locally actionable strategies to increase participant acceptability and feasibility to participate in Phase I cancer clinical trials

BACKGROUND

Recruitment of cancer clinical trial (CCT) participants, especially participants representing the diversity of the US population, is necessary to create successful medications and a continual challenge. These challenges are amplified in Phase I cancer trials that focus on evaluating the safety of new treatments and are the gateway to treatment development. In preparation for recruitment to a Phase I recurrent head and neck cancer (HNC) trial, we assessed perceived barriers to participation or referral and suggestions for recruitment among people with HNC and community physicians (oncologist, otolaryngologist or surgeon).

METHODS

Between December 2020 and February 2022, we conducted a qualitative needs assessment via semistructured interviews with a race and ethnicity-stratified sample of people with HNC (n = 30: 12 non-Hispanic White, 9 non-Hispanic African American, 8 Hispanic and 1 non-Hispanic Pacific Islander) and community physicians (n = 16) within the University of Florida Health Cancer Center catchment area. Interviews were analyzed using a qualitative content analysis approach to describe perspectives and identify relevant themes.

RESULTS

People with HNC reported thematic barriers included: concerns about side effects, safety and efficacy; lack of knowledge and systemic and environmental obstacles. Physicians identified thematic barriers of limited physician knowledge; clinic and physician barriers and structural barriers. People with HNC and physicians recommended themes included: improved patient education, dissemination of trial information and interpersonal communication between community physicians and CCT staff.

CONCLUSIONS

The themes identified by people with HNC and community physicians are consistent with research efforts and recommendations on how to increase the participation of people from minoritized populations in CCTs. This community needs assessment provides direction on the selection of strategies to increase CCT participation and referral.

PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION

This study focused on people with HNC and community physicians' lived experience and their interpretations of how they would consider a future Phase I clinical trial. In addition to our qualitative data reflecting community voices, a community member reviewed the draft interview guide before data collection and both people with HNC and physicians aided interpretation of the findings.

Rural cancer disparities from Oklahoma cancer and vital records registries 2016-2020

OBJECTIVES

Compared to Oklahoma, 33 states have higher all-cause cancer incidence rates, but only three states have higher all-cause cancer mortality rates. Given this troubling gap between Oklahoma's cancer incidence and mortality rankings, in-depth examination of cancer incidence, staging, and mortality rates among this state's high-risk populations is warranted. This study provides in-depth information on overall and cause-specific cancer incidence and mortality for the rural and urban Oklahoma populations classified by Rural-Urban Continuum Codes (RUCC).

METHODS

Data were publicly available and de-identified, accessed through Oklahoma Statistics on Health Available for Everyone (OK2SHARE). Statistical analysis included calculating age-specific rates, age-adjusted rates, and percentages, as well as assessing temporal patterns using average annual percent change with 95 % confidence intervals determined by Joinpoint regression analysis.

FINDINGS

Urban areas had a higher proportion of female breast cancer cases, while large and small rural areas had higher rates of lung and bronchus cancer. Urban residents were more likely to have private insurance and less likely to have Medicare compared to rural residents. Cancer incidence rates increased with age, and men had higher mortality rates than women. Lung and bronchus cancer was the leading cause of cancer death, with lower rates in urban areas compared to rural areas.

CONCLUSIONS

Findings demonstrate the need to improve the early detection of cancer among the rural populations of Oklahoma. Additionally, the high mortality rates for most types of cancer experienced by the state's rural population underscores the need to improve cancer detection and treatment in these locations.

Increasing Lung Cancer Screening for High-Risk Smokers in a Frontier Population

Northern Plains American Indians (AIs) have some of the highest smoking and lung cancer mortality rates in the USA. They are a high-risk population in which many are eligible for low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) screening, but such screening is rarely used. This study investigated methods to increase LDCT utilization through both a provider and community intervention to lower lung cancer mortality rates. This study used the Precaution Adoption Model for provider and community interventions implemented in four study regions in western South Dakota. The goal was to increase LDCT screening for eligible participants. Intake surveys and LDCT screenings were compared at baseline and 6 months following the education programs for both interventions. A total of 131 providers participated in the provider intervention. At the 6-month follow-up survey, 31 (63%) referred at least one patient for LDCT (p < 0.05). Forty (32.3%) community participants reported their provider recommended an LDCT and of those, 30(75%) reported getting an LDCT (p < 0.05). A total of 2829 patient surveys were completed at the imaging sites and most (88%, n = 962) cited provider recommendation as their reason for obtaining an LDCT. Almost half (46%; n = 131) of the referring providers attended a provider education workshop, and 73% of the providers worked at a clinic that hosted at least one community education session. Over the study period, LDCT utilization increased from 640 to 1706, a 90.9% increase. The provider intervention had the strongest impact on LDCT utilization. This study demonstrated increased LDCT utilization through the provider intervention but increases also were documented for the other intervention combinations. The community-based education program increased both community and provider awareness on the value of LDCTs to lower lung cancer mortality rates.

An Ailment with Which I Will Contend: A Narrative Review of 5000 Years of Esophagogastric Cancers and Their Treatments, with Special Emphasis on Recent Advances in Immunotherapeutics

Esophagogastric cancers are among the most common and deadly cancers worldwide. This review traces their chronology from 3000 BCE to the present. The first several thousand years were devoted to palliation, before advances in operative technique and technology led to the first curative surgery in 1913. Systemic therapies were introduced in 1910, and radiotherapy shortly thereafter. Operative technique improved massively over the 20th century, with operative mortality rates reducing from over 50% in 1933 to less than 5% by 1981. In addition to important roles in palliation, endoscopy became a key nonsurgical curative option for patients with limited-stage disease by the 1990s. The first nonrandomized studies on combination therapies (chemotherapy ± radiation ± surgery) were reported in the early 1980s, with survival benefit only for subsets of patients. Randomized trials over the next decades had similar overall results, with increasing nuance. Disparate conclusions led to regional variation in global practice. Starting with the first FDA approval in 2017, multiple immunotherapies now encompass more indications and earlier lines of therapy. As standards of care incorporate these effective yet expensive therapies, care must be given to disparities and methods for increasing access.

Assessing the Influence of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Gastric Cancer Mortality Risk

BACKGROUND

The global impact of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic on public health has been significant. Upper gastrointestinal endoscopy for screening and diagnosis decreased along with new gastric cancer (GC) diagnoses.

METHODS

This study assesses how the pandemic affected GC mortality using data from Hiroshima Prefecture, comparing mortality rates between patients diagnosed during the pandemic (2020 and 2021) and pre-pandemic (2018 and 2019) periods. The crude hazard ratios (HRs) and HRs adjusted for age, sex, clinical stage, treatment status, and travel distance to the nearest GC screening facility were estimated using Cox regression models. Subgroup and sensitivity analyses were also performed.

RESULTS

A total of 9571 patients were diagnosed, with 4877 eligible for follow-up. The median age was 74 years, and 69% were male. The median follow-up period was 157 days, with events per 1000 person-years at 278 and 374 in the pre-pandemic and pandemic periods, respectively (crude HR, 1.37; adjusted HR, 1.17). The sensitivity and subgroup analyses yielded consistent results.

CONCLUSIONS

The COVID-19 pandemic increased mortality risk in patients with GC. Further studies are required to observe long-term outcomes and identify the disparities contributing to the increased mortality risk.

Availability of cancer survivorship support services across the National Cancer Institute Community Oncology Research Program network

BACKGROUND

National cancer organizations recommend provision of nutrition, physical activity, and mental health supportive services to cancer survivors. However, the availability of these services across diverse community oncology settings remains unclear.

METHODS

The National Cancer Institute Community Oncology Research Program (NCORP) is a national network of community oncology practices engaged in cancer research. The 2022 NCORP Landscape Assessment (5UG1CA189824) assessed individual practices' establishment of survivorship clinics and nutrition, physical activity, and mental health services, resources, and/or referrals. Descriptive statistics summarized and logistic regression quantified the association between services, practice, and patient characteristics.

RESULTS

Of 46 NCORP community sites, 45 (98%) responded to the survey, representing 259 adult practice groups. A total of 41% had a survivorship clinic; 96% offered mental health, 94% nutrition, and 53% physical activity services, resources, and/or referrals. All 3 services were offered in various formats (eg, in-house, referrals, education) by 51% and in-house only by 25% of practices. Practices with advanced practice providers were more likely to have a survivorship clinic (odds ratio [OR] = 3.19, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.04 to 9.76). Practices with at least 30% Medicare patients (OR = 2.54, 95% CI = 1.39 to 4.66) and more oncology providers (OR = 1.02, 95% CI = 1.01 to 1.04) were more likely to have all 3 services in any format. Practices with at least 30% Medicare patients (OR = 3.41, 95% CI = 1.50 to 7.77) and a survivorship clinic (OR = 2.84, 95% CI = 1.57 to 5.14) were more likely to have all 3 services in-house.

CONCLUSIONS

Larger oncology practices and those caring for more survivors on Medicare provided more supportive services, resources, and/or referrals. Smaller practices and those without survivorship clinics may need strategies to address potential gaps in supportive services.

Comparison of US Oncologist Rurality by Practice Setting and Patients Served

Importance

Studies of the oncology workforce most often classify physician rurality by their practice location, but this could miss the true extent of physicians involved in rural cancer care.

Objective

To compare a method for identifying oncology physicians involved in rural cancer care that uses the proportion of rural patients served with the standard method based on practice location.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This cross-sectional study used retrospective Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services encounter data on medical oncologists, radiation oncologists, and surgeons treating Medicare beneficiaries diagnosed with breast, colorectal, or lung cancer from January 1 to December 31, 2019. Data were analyzed from May to September 2023.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The standard method of classifying oncologist physician rurality based on practice location was compared with a novel method of classification based on proportion of rural patients served.

Results

The study included 27 870 oncology physicians (71.3% male), of whom 835 (3.0%) practiced in a rural location. Physicians practicing in a rural location treated a high proportion of rural patients (median, 50.0% [IQR, 16.7%-100%]). When considering the rurality of physicians' patient panels, 5123 physicians (18.4%) whose patient panel included at least 20% rural patients, 3199 (11.5%) with at least 33% rural patients, and 1996 (7.2%) with at least 50% rural patients were identified. Using a physician's patient panel to classify physician rurality revealed a higher number and greater spread of oncology physicians involved in rural cancer care in the US than the standard method, while maintaining high performance (area under the curve, 0.857) and fair concordance (κ, 0.346; 95% CI, 0.323-0.369) with the method based on practice setting.

Conclusions and Relevance

In this cross-sectional study, classifying oncologist rurality by the proportion of rural patients served identified more oncology physicians treating patients living in rural areas than the standard method of practice location and may more accurately capture the rural cancer physician workforce, as many hospitals have historically been located in more urban areas. This new method may be used to improve future studies of rural cancer care delivery.

Disparities in Clinical Trial Enrollment and Reporting in Rectal Cancer: A Systematic Review and Demographic Comparison to the National Cancer Database

BACKGROUND

Cancer care guidelines based on clinical trial data in homogenous populations may not be applicable to all rectal cancer patients. The aim of this study was to evaluate whether patients enrolled in rectal cancer clinical trials (CTs) are representative of United States (U.S.) rectal cancer patients.

METHODS

Prospective rectal cancer CTs from 2010 to 2019 in the United States were systematically reviewed. In trials with multiple arms reporting separate demographic variables, each arm was considered a separate CT group in the analysis. Demographic variables considered in the analysis were age, sex, race/ethnicity, facility location throughout the United States, rural vs urban geography, and facility type. Participant demographics from trial and the National Cancer Database (NCDB) participants were compared using chi-squared goodness of fit and one-sample t-test where applicable.

RESULTS

Of 50 CT groups identified, 42 (82%) studies reported mean or median age. Trial participants were younger compared to NCDB patients (P < .001 all studies). All but three trials had fewer female patients than NCDB (48.2% female, P < .001). Less than half the CT groups reported on race or ethnicity. Eighteen out of 22 trials (82%) had a smaller percentage of Black patients and 4 out of 8 (50%) trials had fewer Hispanic or Spanish origin patients than the NCDB. No CTs reported comorbidities, socioeconomic factors, or education. CT primary sites were largely at academic centers and in urban areas.

CONCLUSION

The present study supports the need for improved demographic representation and transparency in rectal cancer clinical trials.

The interplay of financial toxicity, health care team communication, and psychosocial well-being among rural cancer patients and survivors

BACKGROUND

Financial toxicity contributes to psychosocial distress among cancer patients and survivors. Yet, contextual factors unique to rural settings affect patient experiences, and a deeper understanding is needed of the interplay between financial toxicity and health care team communication and its association with psychosocial well-being among rural oncology patients.

PURPOSE

We examined associations between financial toxicity and psychosocial well-being among rural cancer patients, exploring variability in these linkages by health care team communication.

METHODS

Using data from 273 rural cancer patients who participated in Cancer Support Community's Cancer Experience Registry, we estimated multivariable regression models predicting depression, anxiety, and social function by financial toxicity, health care team communication, and the interplay between them.

RESULTS

We demonstrate robust associations between financial toxicity and psychosocial outcomes among our sample of rural cancer patients and survivors. As financial toxicity increased, symptoms of depression and anxiety increased. Further, financial toxicity was linked with decreasing social function. Having health care team conversations about treatment costs and distress-related care reduced the negative impact of financial toxicity on depressive symptoms and social function, respectively, in rural cancer patients at greatest risk for financial burden.

CONCLUSIONS

Financial toxicity and psychosocial well-being are strongly linked, and these associations were confirmed in a rural sample. A theorized buffer to the detrimental impacts of financial toxicity-health care team communication-played a role in moderating these associations. Our findings suggest that health care providers in rural oncology settings may benefit from tools and resources to bolster communication with patients about costs, financial distress, and coordination of care.

Quality of breast surgery care at a comprehensive cancer center and its rural affiliate hospital

BACKGROUND

Cancer centers are increasingly affiliating with rural hospitals to perform surgery. Perioperative and oncologic outcomes for cancer center surgeons operating at rural hospitals are understudied.

METHODS

For patients with non-metastatic breast cancer from a rural catchment area who had oncologic surgery at an NCI-designated comprehensive cancer center (CC) or its rural affiliate (RA) from 2017 to 2022, we compared perioperative outcomes (composite of surgical site infection, seroma requiring drainage, and reoperation for margins) and receipt of guideline-concordant care (if patient received all applicable treatments) using descriptive statistics and chi-squared tests.

RESULTS

Among 168 patients, 99 had surgery at RA, 60 CC. RA patients were older, higher stage, and more often had lumpectomy. There were no differences in perioperative outcomes (CC 10%, RA 14%, p ​= ​0.445) or guideline concordant care (RA 76%, CC 78%, p ​= ​0.846).

CONCLUSIONS

Cancer center surgeons operating at a rural affiliate had comparable perioperative outcomes and guideline-concordant care.

The impact of rural structural and community health factors on postmastectomy complications among south central Appalachian breast cancer patients

PURPOSE

The study examined how structural and community health factors, including primary care physicians (PCP), food insecurity, diabetes, and mortality rate per county, are linked to the number and severity of postmastectomy complications among south central Appalachian breast cancer patients depending on rural status.

METHODS

Data was obtained through a retrospective review of 473 breast cancer patients that underwent a mastectomy from 2017 to 2021. Patient's ZIP Code was used to determine their rural-urban community area code and their county of residence for census data. We conducted a zero inflated Poisson regression.

FINDINGS

Results demonstrated that patients in small rural/isolated areas with low (B = -4.10, SE = 1.93, OR = 0.02, p = 0.03) to average (B = -2.67, SE = 1.32, OR = 0.07, p = 0.04) food insecurity and average (B = -2.67, SE = 1.32, OR = 0.07, p = 0.04) to high (B = -10.62, SE = 4.71, OR = 0.00, p = 0.02) PCP have significantly fewer postmastectomy complications compared to their urban counterparts. Additionally, patients residing in small rural/isolated areas with high (B = 4.47, SE = 0.49, d = 0.42, p < 0.001) diabetes and low mortality (B = 5.70, SE = 0.58, d = 0.45, p < 0.001) rates have significantly more severe postmastectomy complications.

CONCLUSION

These findings demonstrate that patients who reside in small/rural isolated areas may experience fewer and less severe postmastectomy when there is certain optimal structural and community health factors present compared to their urban counterparts. Oncologic care teams could utilize this information in routine consult for risk assessment and mitigation. Future research should further examine additional risks for postmastectomy complications.

Urban-Rural Differences in Receipt of Cancer Surgery at High-Volume Hospitals and Sensitivity to Hospital Volume Thresholds

Methods for identifying high-volume hospitals affect conclusions about rural cancer care access.

Realizing the Dream of Precision Oncology: A Solution for All Patients

MICRO-ABSTRACT

As molecularly informed oncology care has increasingly become standard practice for patients with cancer, society must prioritize equitable access to genetic testing that guides subsequent care. Despite the availability of genomic testing laboratories, published guidelines, US Food and Drug Administration-approved targeted therapies, financial assistance programs, and clinical decision tools, precision medicine remains out of reach for many patients. While there has been modest improvement in testing rates in recent years, molecular testing and targeted therapy for cancer patients continue to vary by practice setting and patient insurance status, and racial and socioeconomic disparities persist. National standards and centralized solutions are needed to promote the equitable distribution of patient benefit from precision medicine technology. Although various online resources are currently available, no single all-encompassing precision oncology tool currently exists. A one-stop shop to address all aspects of precision oncology-tissue selection and test ordering, interpretation of results, prescribing targeted therapies, and enrolling patients in clinical trials-would disrupt cancer care. Recent advances in artificial intelligence, digital pathology, and data science provide an opportunity for stakeholders to partner together to leverage these technologies to develop this unified, freely accessible, national solution. Whether locoregionally, nationally, or internationally, only collaborative efforts can fully realize the potential of technological advancements in molecular pathology and oncology therapeutics for all cancer patients.

Social Determinants of Cancer Disparities

Cancer is a major public health issue that is associated with significant morbidity and mortality across the globe. At its root, cancer represents a genetic aberration, but socioeconomic, environmental, and geographic factors contribute to different cancer outcomes for selected population subsets. The disparities in the delivery of healthcare affect all aspects of cancer management from early prevention to end-of-life care. In an effort to address the inequality in the delivery of healthcare among socioeconomically disadvantaged populations, the World Health Organization defined social determinants of health (SDOH) as conditions in which people are born, live, work, and age. These factors play a significant role in the disproportionate cancer burden among different population groups. SDOH are associated with disparities in risk factor burden, screening modalities, diagnostic testing, treatment options, and quality of life of patients with cancer. The purpose of this article is to describe a more holistic and integrated approach to patients with cancer and address the disparities that are derived from their socioeconomic background.

Colorectal Cancer Knowledge and Screening Change in African Americans: Implementation Phase Results of the EPICS Cluster RCT

Introduction

African Americans are disproportionately affected by mortality risk for colorectal cancer. This study aimed to determine the most effective educational approach of 4 study arms that enhances the likelihood of pursuing subsequent colorectal cancer screening, and to identify the associated factors.

Methods

Age-eligible adults (N=2,877) were recruited to participate in a cluster randomized control dissemination and intervention implementation trial titled Educational Program to Increase Colorectal Cancer Screening. The project began in May 2012 and ended in March 2017 (the implementation phase lasted 36 months). Educational sessions were conducted through 16 community coalitions that were randomized into 1 of 4 conditions: website access (to facilitator training materials and toolkits) without technical assistance, website access with technical assistance, in-person training (provided by research staff and website access) without technical assistance, and in-person training with technical assistance. A follow-up to determine participant CRC screening was conducted 3 months later.

Results

Compared with the website access with technical assistance intervention group, 2 groups, in-person training with technical assistance and without technical assistance, indicated significantly higher odds for obtaining colorectal cancer screening (OR=1.31; 95% CI=1.04, 1.64; p=0.02 and OR=1.35; 95% CI=1.07, 1.71; p=0.01, respectively). Though sociodemographic factors were not significantly associated with pursuing subsequent colorectal cancer screening, the postintervention cancer knowledge increased significantly among the study participants.

Conclusions

The importance of in-person interactions, local coalitions, and community contexts may play a key role for successfully increasing colorectal cancer screening rates among African Americans as reflected through this study. The integration of telehealth and use of other virtual technologies to engage the public in research have increased since the COVID-19 pandemic and should be assessed to determine their impact on the degree to which in-person interventions are significantly more effective when compared with solely web-assisted ones.

Trial registration

The study is registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov NCT01805622.

Behavior Change Techniques for the Maintenance of Physical Activity in Cancer

Ester et al report the findings from a 2-arm cluster randomized controlled trial nested within a hybrid effectiveness-implementation study, which involved a 12-week exercise and behavior change program for rural and remote Canadians (Exercise for Cancer to Enhance Living Well [EXCEL]). The addition of 23 weeks of app-based physical activity monitoring to the EXCEL program did not result in significant between-group differences in physical activity at 6 months. While several behavior change techniques were included in the initial 12-week intervention, additional techniques were embedded within the mobile app. However, there is currently a lack of evidence regarding how many and which behavior change techniques are the most effective for people with cancer and if these differ based on individual characteristics. Potentially, the use of the mobile app was not required in addition to the behavior change support delivered to both groups as part of the EXCEL program. Further research should involve participants who may be in most need of behavioral support, for example, those with lower levels of self-efficacy. Suggestions for future research to tailor behavior change support for people with cancer are discussed.

The impact of travel time to cancer treatment centre on post-diagnosis care and mortality among cancer patients in Scotland

Limited data exist on the effect of travelling time on post-diagnosis cancer care and mortality. We analysed the impact of travel time to cancer treatment centre on secondary care contact time and one-year mortality using a data-linkage study in Scotland with 17369 patients. Patients with longer travelling time and island-dwellers had increased incidence rate of secondary care cancer contact time. For outpatient oncology appointments, the incidence rate was decreased for island-dwellers. Longer travelling time was not associated with increased secondary care contact time for emergency cancer admissions or time to first emergency cancer admission. Living on an island increased mortality at one-year. Adjusting for cancer-specific secondary care contact time increased the hazard of death, and adjusting for oncology outpatient time decreased the hazard of death for island-dwellers. Those with longer travelling times experience the cancer treatment pathway differently with poorer outcomes. Cancer services may need to be better configured to suit differing needs of dispersed populations.

Access to Care and Healthcare Quality Metrics for Patients with Advanced Genitourinary Cancers in Urban versus Rural Areas

Compared to the urban population, patients in rural areas face healthcare disparities and experience inferior healthcare-related outcomes. To compare the healthcare quality metrics and outcomes between patients with advanced genitourinary cancers from rural versus urban areas treated at a tertiary cancer hospital, in this retrospective study, eligible patients with advanced genitourinary cancers were treated at Huntsman Cancer Institute, an NCI-Designated Comprehensive Cancer Center in Utah. Rural-urban commuting area codes were used to classify the patients' residences as being in urban (1-3) or rural (4-10) areas. The straight line distances of the patients' residences from the cancer center were also calculated and included in the analysis. The median household income data were obtained and calculated from "The Michigan Population Studies Center", based on individual zip codes. In this study, 2312 patients were screened, and 1025 eligible patients were included for further analysis (metastatic prostate cancer (n = 679), metastatic bladder cancer (n = 184), and metastatic renal cell carcinoma (n = 162). Most patients (83.9%) came from urban areas, while the remainder were from rural areas. Both groups had comparable demographic profiles and tumor characteristics at baseline. The annual median household income of urban patients was $8604 higher than that of rural patients (p < 0.001). There were fewer urban patients with Medicare (44.9% vs. 50.9%) and more urban patients with private insurance (40.4% vs. 35.1%). There was no difference between the urban and rural patients regarding receiving systemic therapies, enrollment in clinical trials, or tumor genomic profiling. The overall survival rate was not significantly different between the two populations in metastatic prostate, bladder, and kidney cancer, respectively. As available in a tertiary cancer hospital, access to care can mitigate the difference in the quality of healthcare and clinical outcomes in urban versus rural patients.

The Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Cancer Mortality in Pennsylvania: A Retrospective Study with Geospatial Analysis

BACKGROUND

We sought to quantify the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on cancer mortality and identify associated factors in Pennsylvania.

METHODS

The retrospective study analyzed cross-sectional cancer mortality data from CDC WONDER for 2015 through 2020 for Pennsylvania and its 67 counties. The spatial distributions of 2019, 2020, and percentage change in age-adjusted mortality rates by county were analyzed via choropleth maps and spatial autocorrelation. A Wilcoxon Signed Rank Test was used to analyze whether the rates differed between 2019 and 2020. Quasi-Poisson and geographically weighted regression at the county level were used to assess the association between the 2019 rates, sex (percent female), race (percent non-White), ethnicity (percent Hispanic/Latino), rural-urban continuum codes, and socioeconomic status with the 2020 rates.

RESULTS

At the state level, the rate in 2020 did not reflect the declining annual trend (-2.7 per 100,000) in the rate since 2015. Twenty-six counties had an increase in the rate in 2020. Of the factors examined, the 2019 rates were positively associated with the 2020 rates, and the impact of sociodemographic and geographic factors on the 2020 rates varied by county.

CONCLUSIONS

In Pennsylvania, the 2020 cancer mortality rates did not decline as much as reported before the COVID-19 pandemic. The top five cancer types by rate were the same type for 2019 and 2020. Future cancer control efforts may need to address the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on trends and geospatial distribution in cancer mortality.