Geographic Disparities in Oncologic Treatment and Outcomes: The Urban-Rural Divide

Development of the Rural Perception Scale (RPS-18)

BACKGROUND

People living in rural areas often experience limited access to health resources, slow knowledge diffusion, and geographical isolation, and tend to be at higher risk for poor physical and mental health outcomes compared with nonrural populations. It is unclear, yet, how the concept of "rural" shapes observed differences from nonrural populations. We aim to develop a psychometrically sound scale to assess key dimensions that constitute individual-level perceived rurality.

METHODS

We first conducted a broad literature review to identify a priori concepts related to rurality and adapted survey items measuring relevant constructs, such as loneliness, attitudes toward people living in rural areas, and perceived social membership. We used these conceptual constructs and measures to develop a survey questionnaire focused on rural perceptions. We recruit residents in 3 rural states: Kentucky, New Hampshire, and Vermont. Using the explorative factor analysis and second-order measurement model in the structural equation model framework, we developed a rural perception scale consisting of 18 items.

RESULTS

We recruited 1,384 participants (n = 686 from KY; n = 698 from NH/VT) using Amazon Mechanical Turk (n = 897, 64.8%) and social media paid ads (n = 487, 35.2%). The average age of participants was 41 years old (SD = 15); 54.7% of respondents had less than college graduate education, and 94.2% reported their race as non-Hispanic White. Majority of the participants were from Rural Urban Commuting Area (RUCA)-designated urban areas (n = 798, 57.7%), followed by RUCA-designated large rural areas (257, 18.6%), RUCA-designated rural areas (n = 174, 12.6%) and RUCA-designated isolated areas (n = 133, 9.6%). Our final model revealed 4 latent constructs: "belonging" (Cronbach's α = 0.896), "attitudes toward rural life" (Cronbach's α = 0.807), "loneliness" (Cronbach's α = 0.898), and "community social ties to people in their community" (Cronbach's α = 0.846).

CONCLUSIONS

We identified 4 subfactors of the umbrella concept of rurality that explain how people in rural regions may perceive being in rural environments and having rural lifestyles.

The impact of social determinants of health on textbook oncological outcomes and overall survival in locally advanced non-small cell lung cancer

Objectives

Textbook oncological outcome (TOO) is a composite metric for surgical outcomes, including non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). We hypothesized that social determinants of health (SDH) can affect both the attainment of TOO and the overall survival (OS) in surgically resected NSCLC patients with pathological nodal disease.

Methods

We queried the National Cancer Database (2010-2017) for preoperative therapy-naïve lobectomies for NSCLC with tumor size <7 cm and pathologic N1/N2. Socioeconomic factors comprised SDH scores, where SDH negative (-) was considered if SDH ≥2 (disadvantage); otherwise, SDH was positive (+). TOO+ was defined as R0 resection, ≥5 lymph nodes resected, hospital stay <75th percentile, no 30-day mortality, adjuvant chemotherapy initiation ≤3 months, and no unplanned readmission. If one of these parameters was not achieved, the case was considered TOO-.

Results

Of 11,274 patients, 48% of cases were TOO+ and 38% were SDH+. A total of 15% of patients were SDH- and were less likely (adjusted odds ratio, 0.85; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.78-0.92) to achieve TOO+ than patients with SDH+. After accounting for confounders, patients with TOO+ had 22% lower overall mortality than patients with TOO- (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.78; CI, 0.73-0.82). In contrast, SDH- remained an independently significant risk factor, reducing survival by 24% compared with SDH+ (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.24; CI, 1.17-1.32). The impact of SDH on OS was significant for both patients with TOO+ and TOO-: SDH+/TOO+ had the best OS and SDH-/TOO-had the worst OS.

Conclusions

SDH score has a significant association with TOO achievement and TOO-driven overall posttreatment survival in patients with lobectomy-resected NSCLC with postoperative pathologic N1/N2 nodal metastasis. Addressing SDH is important to optimize care and long-term survival of this patient population.

Intersectionality in cancer care: A systematic review of current research and future directions

OBJECTIVES

The objective of the current review was to synthesize the literature on intersectionality relative to disparities across the cancer care continuum. A model to support future intersectional cancer research was proposed.

METHODS

Web-based discovery services and discipline-specific databases were queried for both peer-reviewed and gray literature. Study screening and data extraction were facilitated through the Covidence software platform.

RESULTS

Among 497 screened studies, 28 met study inclusion criteria. Most articles were peer-reviewed empirical studies (n = 22) that focused on pre-diagnosis/screening (n = 19) and included marginalized racial/ethnic (n = 22) identities. Pre-cancer diagnosis, sexual orientation and race influenced women's screening and vaccine behaviors. Sexual minority women, particularly individuals of color, were less likely to engage in cancer prevention behaviors prior to diagnosis. Race and socioeconomic status (SES) were important factors in patient care/survivorship with worse outcomes among non-white women of low SES. Emergent themes in qualitative results emphasized the importance of patient intersectional identities, as well as feelings of marginalization, fears of discrimination, and general discomfort with providers as barriers to seeking cancer care.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with intersectional identities often experience barriers to cancer care that adversely impact screening, diagnosis, treatment, as well as survivorship. The use of an "intersectional lens" as a future clinical and research framework will facilitate a more multidimensional and holistic approach to the care of cancer patients.