Delays in Care Associated With Non-English-Speaking Patients With Breast Cancer

Association of Race, Ethnicity, Language, and Insurance with Time to Treatment Initiation Among Women with Breast Cancer at an Urban, Academic, Safety-Net Hospital

INTRODUCTION

Initial treatment for nonmetastatic breast cancer is resection or neoadjuvant systemic therapy, depending on tumor biology and patient factors. Delays in treatment have been shown to impact survival and quality of life. Little has been published on the performance of safety-net hospitals in delivering timely care for all patients.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective study of patients with invasive ductal or lobular breast cancer, diagnosed and treated between 2009 and 2019 at an academic, safety-net hospital. Time to treatment initiation was calculated for all patients. Consistent with a recently published Committee on Cancer timeliness metric, a treatment delay was defined as time from tissue diagnosis to treatment of greater than 60 days.

RESULTS

A total of 799 eligible women with stage 1-3 breast cancer met study criteria. Median age was 60 years, 55.7% were non-white, 35.5% were non-English-speaking, 18.9% were Hispanic, and 49.4% were Medicaid/uninsured. Median time to treatment was 41 days (IQR 27-56 days), while 81.1% of patients initiated treatment within 60 days. The frequency of treatment delays did not vary by race, ethnicity, insurance, or language. Diagnosis year was inversely associated with the occurrence of a treatment delay (OR: 0.944, 95% CI 0.893-0.997, p value: 0.039).

CONCLUSION

At our institution, race, ethnicity, insurance, and language were not associated with treatment delay. Additional research is needed to determine how our safety-net hospital delivered timely care to all patients with breast cancer, as reducing delays in care may be one mechanism by which health systems can mitigate disparities in the treatment of breast cancer.

How representative are participants in geriatric oncology clinical trials? The case of the 5C RCT in geriatric oncology: A cross-sectional comparison to a geriatric oncology clinic

INTRODUCTION

Frail older adults make up a substantial portion of the older adult population. However, frail patients are often excluded from randomized controlled trials. This underrepresentation restricts the extent to which trial findings can be generalized to this population. We compared a sample from the Canadian 5C Randomized Controlled Trial investigating comprehensive geriatric assessment (CGA) in the geriatric oncology setting in terms of frailty to patients referred to the Older Adults with Cancer Clinic (OACC) to determine if the trial sample was representative of the normal geriatric oncology practice.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Baseline CGA data of 5C Trial participants seen at the Princess Margaret Cancer Centre (PM), were compared to data from OACC patients that were seen during the duration of the 5C trial (between April 2018 and April 2020) and that satisfied the 5C inclusion criteria. To assess the frailty of samples, sex, age, disease site, comorbidity level, medical optimization, social supports, functional status, falls risk, nutrition, cognition, and mood were compared between 5C participants and OACC patients using Fisher's exact and independent samples t-test.

RESULTS

A sample of 115 5C participants and 205 OACC patients were included. The mean age of 5C participants and OACC patients was 75.4 and 81.6 years, respectively (p < 0.001). The distribution of disease sites was significantly different between the samples (p < 0.001) and OACC patients were also significantly more impaired compared to 5C participants in comorbidity (23.4% versus 10.4% high comorbidity) (p = 0.001), IADL dependence (55.1% versus 42.6%) (p = 0.036), impaired physical function (70.6% versus 31.3%) (p < 0.001), falls risk (67.8% versus 27%) (p < 0.001), impaired nutrition (55.6% versus 40.9%) (p = 0.014), and cognition (47.2% versus 10%) (p < 0.001). There were no differences in sex, medication optimization, poor social supports, and impaired mood between the samples.

DISCUSSION

The 5C sample was less frail and younger than patients seen in the geriatric oncology clinic. Finding strategies to address barriers to the inclusion of frailer older adults is important to increase their representation in future trials to allow findings to be generalized to this vulnerable population.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Clinicaltrials.gov # NCT03154671.

Timeliness of Multimodal Care for At-Risk Breast Cancer Patients at a Safety Net Institution

INTRODUCTION

Because limited data exist, we sought to evaluate timeliness of multimodal treatments in a safety net breast cancer population.

METHODS

Breast cancer patients treated at a safety net hospital from 2016 to 2020 were analyzed retrospectively. Time intervals were defined as primary time (PT) from diagnosis to initiation of primary intervention, secondary time (ST) from completion of primary to initiation of secondary intervention, and tertiary time (TT) from completion of secondary to initiation of tertiary intervention. Variables included primary language, insurance type, and race.

RESULTS

Of 223 patients, 99 (44.4%) primarily spoke Spanish, 29 (13.0%) were of Black race, and 184 (82.5%) had Medicaid or uninsured status. Median (IQR) age at diagnosis was 55 (48-62) years. Primary intervention was surgical in 127/216 (58.8%); secondary intervention was systemic in 38/169 (22.5%); and tertiary intervention was radiation in 67/80 (83.8%). Overall, median days (IQR) for PT were 69 (53, 98), ST were 65 (42, 95), and TT were 69 (43, 88). PT was significantly longer in Black [105 (76, 142) days] patients compared to non-Hispanic White patients [68 (51, 107) days, P = 0.031)] and White Hispanic patients [65 (53,91) days, P = 0.014]. There were no significant differences in PT, ST, or TT by spoken language or insurance type.

CONCLUSIONS

Black patients remain at risk due to prolonged time to intervention. Spanish-speaking status was not associated with inferior timeliness or completion of multimodal care at a safety net hospital. Identifying safety net hospital barriers to achieving benchmarks for timely completion of all phases of multimodal care warrants further attention.

Causes and costs of delayed closure of ileostomies in rectal cancer patients in Australasian units

BACKGROUND

Defunctioning loop ileostomies (DLIs) are a frequent adjunct to rectal cancer surgery. Delayed closure of DLIs is common and associated with increased morbidity. The reasons for delayed DLI closure are often unknown. The economic burden of delayed DLI closure is not quantified. The present study aimed to determine the reasons for, and economic burden of, delayed DLI closure.

METHODS

Clinical and economic data were audited from a prospective database of patients in two Australasian colorectal cancer centres. Patients treated at each unit with low/ultra-low anterior resection for rectal cancer with formation of DLI between January 2014 and December 2019 were included. Post-operative complication rate, stoma-related complication rate and costs of hospital admissions and stoma care were recorded and analysed. Multivariate linear regression analysis was used to investigate risk factors for delay to closure.

RESULTS

146 patients underwent low/ultra-low anterior resection with DLI; 135 patients (92.5%) underwent reversal. The median duration to reversal was 7 months (IQR 4.5-9.5). Sixty-six percent of patients underwent reversal >6 months after their index surgery. Neoadjuvant and adjuvant chemotherapy were associated with delayed reversal (P < 0.001). Non-English speakers waited longer for DLI closure (P = 0.028). The costs of outpatient stoma care (P < 0.001), post-operative care (P = 0.004), and total cost of treatment (P = 0.014) were significantly higher in the delayed closure group, with a total cost of treatment difference of $3854 NZD per patient.

CONCLUSIONS

Causes of delay include systemic factors and demographic factors that can be addressed directly, addressing such causes may alleviate a significant economic burden.

BI-RADS 0 Screening Mammography: Risk Factors That Prevent or Delay Follow-Up Time to Diagnostic Evaluation

OBJECTIVE

BI-RADS 0 screening mammograms require follow-up diagnostic imaging, optimally within 60 days. Our study aims to identify risk factors for delayed follow-up.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective case-control study of individuals who had a nondiagnostic BI-RADS 0 screening mammogram between March 19, 2018, and March 19, 2020. Sociodemographic information was collected from self-reported questionnaire. We aimed to identify factors associated with <60-day follow-up, >60-day follow-up, or no follow-up outcomes. The χ² test and univariate logistic regressions were performed. Significant variables were included in multinomial logistic regression. We also aimed to identify risk factors that lead to delayed follow-up times among individuals with follow-up. Spearman's correlation and Mann-Whitney Wilcoxon tests and Kruskal-Wallis tests were performed.

RESULTS

Review returned 5,034 screening mammograms. Of 4,552 individuals included, 904 (19.9%) had no follow-up. Of the 3,648 (80.1%) with follow-up, 2,797 (76.7%) had a follow-up <60 days (median 20 days) and 851 (23.3%) had follow-up >60 days (median 176 days). Multinomial regression found that Asian (P = .022), Black (P < .0001), and individuals who identified their race as other (P < .0001) were independently more likely to have no or >60-day follow-up. Individuals who did not report their race (P = .001) or completed the questionnaire in Spanish (P = .025) were more likely to have no or >60-day follow-up. Amongst individuals with follow-up, Black individuals (P < .0001), those who identified their race as other (P < .0001), Hispanic individuals (P = .04), and those who completed the questionnaire in Spanish (P < .0001) had follow-up delays. BRCA-positive individuals had shorter follow-up times (P = .021).

DISCUSSION

Follow-up time is affected by cancer risk factors such as BRCA status in addition to race, preferred language, and Hispanic ethnicity.