BACKGROUND: American Indians (AIs) in the Northern Plains region suffer disproportionately high cancer mortality rates compared with the general US population and with AIs from other regions in the United States. METHODS: The National Cancer Institute developed the Cancer Disparity Research Partnership to address these inequities. This initiative in Rapid City, South Dakota, attempts to lower cancer mortality rates for AIs by access to innovative clinical trials, behavioral research, and a genetic study. Patient navigation is a critical part of the program. Two navigation strategies are described: navigators at the cancer center and navigators on each reservation. A retrospective analysis was performed to determine if navigated patients (n = 42) undergoing potentially curative radiotherapy had fewer treatment interruptions compared with nonnavigated patients (n = 74). RESULTS: A total of 213 AIs with cancer have undergone patient navigation. For those undergoing cancer treatment, the median number of patient navigation interactions was 15 (range 1 to 95), whereas for those seen in follow-up after their cancer treatment, the median number of contacts was 4 (range 1 to 26). AIs who received navigation services during curative radiation treatment had on average 3 fewer days of treatment interruptions compared to AIs who did not receive navigation services during curative radiation treatment (P = .002, N = 116). CONCLUSIONS: Early findings suggest that patient navigation is a critical component in addressing cancer disparities in this population. The program has established trust with individual cancer patients, with the tribal councils, and with the general population on each of the three reservations of western South Dakota.
BACKGROUND: American Indians (AIs) in the Northern Plains region suffer disproportionately high cancer mortality rates compared with the general US population and with AIs from other regions in the United States. METHODS: The National Cancer Institute developed the Cancer Disparity Research Partnership to address these inequities. This initiative in Rapid City, South Dakota, attempts to lower cancer mortality rates for AIs by access to innovative clinical trials, behavioral research, and a genetic study. Patient navigation is a critical part of the program. Two navigation strategies are described: navigators at the cancer center and navigators on each reservation. A retrospective analysis was performed to determine if navigated patients (n = 42) undergoing potentially curative radiotherapy had fewer treatment interruptions compared with nonnavigated patients (n = 74). RESULTS: A total of 213 AIs with cancer have undergone patient navigation. For those undergoing cancer treatment, the median number of patient navigation interactions was 15 (range 1 to 95), whereas for those seen in follow-up after their cancer treatment, the median number of contacts was 4 (range 1 to 26). AIs who received navigation services during curative radiation treatment had on average 3 fewer days of treatment interruptions compared to AIs who did not receive navigation services during curative radiation treatment (P = .002, N = 116). CONCLUSIONS: Early findings suggest that patient navigation is a critical component in addressing cancer disparities in this population. The program has established trust with individual cancerpatients, with the tribal councils, and with the general population on each of the three reservations of western South Dakota.
Authors: Daniel G Petereit; Deborah Rogers; Frank Govern; Norman Coleman; Christen H Osburn; Steve P Howard; Judith Kaur; Linda Burhansstipanov; C Jack F Fowler; Richard Chappell; Minesh P Mehta Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2004-11-15 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Joann G Elmore; Connie Y Nakano; Hannah M Linden; Lisa M Reisch; John Z Ayanian; Eric B Larson Journal: Med Care Date: 2005-02 Impact factor: 2.983
Authors: D G Petereit; J N Sarkaria; R Chappell; J F Fowler; T J Hartmann; T J Kinsella; J A Stitt; B R Thomadsen; D A Buchler Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 1995-07-30 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: T R Mackie; T Holmes; S Swerdloff; P Reckwerdt; J O Deasy; J Yang; B Paliwal; T Kinsella Journal: Med Phys Date: 1993 Nov-Dec Impact factor: 4.071
Authors: Daniel G Petereit; Deborah Rogers; Linda Burhansstipanov; Judith Kaur; Frank Govern; Steve P Howard; Christen H Osburn; C Norman Coleman; Jack F Fowler; Richard Chappell; Minesh P Mehta Journal: J Cancer Educ Date: 2005 Impact factor: 2.037
Authors: Michael L Steinberg; Allen Fremont; David C Khan; David Huang; Herschel Knapp; Deborah Karaman; Nell Forge; Keith Andre; Lisa M Chaiken; Oscar E Streeter Journal: Cancer Date: 2006-12-01 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Erica S Spatz; Michael S Phipps; Oliver J Wang; Suzanne Lagarde; Georgina I Lucas; Leslie A Curry; Marjorie S Rosenthal Journal: Health Serv Res Date: 2011-10-18 Impact factor: 3.402
Authors: Martin P Charns; Mary K Foster; Elaine C Alligood; Justin K Benzer; James F Burgess; Donna Li; Nathalie M McIntosh; Allison Burness; Melissa R Partin; Steven B Clauser Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr Date: 2012-05
Authors: Cathy D Meade; Kristen J Wells; Mariana Arevalo; Ercilia R Calcano; Marlene Rivera; Yolanda Sarmiento; Harold P Freeman; Richard G Roetzheim Journal: J Cancer Educ Date: 2014-09 Impact factor: 2.037
Authors: Amy V Groom; Cheyenne Jim; Mic Laroque; Cheryl Mason; Joe McLaughlin; Lisa Neel; Terry Powell; Thomas Weiser; Ralph T Bryan Journal: Am J Public Health Date: 2009-05-21 Impact factor: 9.308
Authors: Linda U Krebs; Linda Burhansstipanov; Shinobu Watanabe-Galloway; Noel L Pingatore; Daniel G Petereit; Debra Isham Journal: Semin Oncol Nurs Date: 2013-05 Impact factor: 2.315