Meredith A Ray1, Nicholas R Faris2, Anna Derrick3, Matthew P Smeltzer1, Raymond U Osarogiagbon4. 1. Division of Epidemiology, Biostatistics, and Environmental Health, School of Public Health, University of Memphis, Memphis, TN. 2. Multidisciplinary Thoracic Oncology Program, Baptist Cancer Center, Memphis, TN. 3. Baptist Memorial Health Care Corporation, Memphis, TN. 4. Multidisciplinary Thoracic Oncology Program, Baptist Cancer Center, Memphis, TN. Electronic address: rosarogi@bmhcc.org.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: To eliminate them, non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) care and outcome disparities need to be better understood. RESEARCH QUESTION: How does rurality interact with NSCLC care and outcome disparities? STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: We examined guideline-concordant use of active treatment for NSCLC across five institutions in one community-based health care system spanning 44% of the Delta Regional Authority catchment area from 2011 to 2017. Institution- and patient-level rurality were based on Rural-Urban Commuting Area codes. Chi-squared, F-tests, and logistic regressions were used to analyze differences across institutions and rurality; survival was examined using log-rank tests and Cox regression. RESULTS: Of 6,259 patients, 47% resided in rural areas; two of five institutions were rurally located and provided care for 20% of patients. Compared with rural residents at rural institutions, urban and rural residents attending urban institutions were more likely to receive stage-preferred treatment: OR 1.68 (95%CI, 1.44-1.96), and 1.33 (1.11-1.61), respectively, after adjusting for insurance, age, and clinical stage. Urban and rural residents attending urban institutions had a lower hazard of death compared with rural residents attending rural institutions: hazard ratio (HR) 0.69 (0.64-0.75) and 0.61 (0.55-0.67), respectively. Among recipients of stage-preferred treatment, care at urban institutions remained less hazardous: HR 0.7 (0.63-0.79). When further stratified by stage, care for late-stage patients at urban institutions remained less hazardous: HR 0.8 (0.71-0.91). INTERPRETATION: Rurality-associated treatment and survival disparities were present at the patient and institution levels, but the institution-level disparity was greater. Rural residents receiving care at urban institutions had similar outcomes to urban residents receiving care at urban hospitals. To overcome rurality-associated NSCLC survival disparity, interventions should preferentially target the institution level, including expanding access to higher-quality guideline-concordant care.
BACKGROUND: To eliminate them, non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) care and outcome disparities need to be better understood. RESEARCH QUESTION: How does rurality interact with NSCLC care and outcome disparities? STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: We examined guideline-concordant use of active treatment for NSCLC across five institutions in one community-based health care system spanning 44% of the Delta Regional Authority catchment area from 2011 to 2017. Institution- and patient-level rurality were based on Rural-Urban Commuting Area codes. Chi-squared, F-tests, and logistic regressions were used to analyze differences across institutions and rurality; survival was examined using log-rank tests and Cox regression. RESULTS: Of 6,259 patients, 47% resided in rural areas; two of five institutions were rurally located and provided care for 20% of patients. Compared with rural residents at rural institutions, urban and rural residents attending urban institutions were more likely to receive stage-preferred treatment: OR 1.68 (95%CI, 1.44-1.96), and 1.33 (1.11-1.61), respectively, after adjusting for insurance, age, and clinical stage. Urban and rural residents attending urban institutions had a lower hazard of death compared with rural residents attending rural institutions: hazard ratio (HR) 0.69 (0.64-0.75) and 0.61 (0.55-0.67), respectively. Among recipients of stage-preferred treatment, care at urban institutions remained less hazardous: HR 0.7 (0.63-0.79). When further stratified by stage, care for late-stage patients at urban institutions remained less hazardous: HR 0.8 (0.71-0.91). INTERPRETATION: Rurality-associated treatment and survival disparities were present at the patient and institution levels, but the institution-level disparity was greater. Rural residents receiving care at urban institutions had similar outcomes to urban residents receiving care at urban hospitals. To overcome rurality-associated NSCLC survival disparity, interventions should preferentially target the institution level, including expanding access to higher-quality guideline-concordant care.
Authors: Frank C Detterbeck; Sandra Zelman Lewis; Rebecca Diekemper; Doreen Addrizzo-Harris; W Michael Alberts Journal: Chest Date: 2013-05 Impact factor: 9.410
Authors: Daniel R Gomez; George R Blumenschein; J Jack Lee; Mike Hernandez; Rong Ye; D Ross Camidge; Robert C Doebele; Ferdinandos Skoulidis; Laurie E Gaspar; Don L Gibbons; Jose A Karam; Brian D Kavanagh; Chad Tang; Ritsuko Komaki; Alexander V Louie; David A Palma; Anne S Tsao; Boris Sepesi; William N William; Jianjun Zhang; Qiuling Shi; Xin Shelley Wang; Stephen G Swisher; John V Heymach Journal: Lancet Oncol Date: 2016-10-24 Impact factor: 41.316
Authors: Marquita W Lewis-Thames; Marvin E Langston; Saira Khan; Yunan Han; Lindsay Fuzzell; Shuai Xu; Justin Xavier Moore Journal: JAMA Netw Open Date: 2022-05-02
Authors: Smita Bhatia; Wendy Landier; Electra D Paskett; Katherine B Peters; Janette K Merrill; Jonathan Phillips; Raymond U Osarogiagbon Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2022-07-11 Impact factor: 11.816
Authors: Meredith A Ray; Nicholas R Faris; Carrie Fehnel; Anna Derrick; Matthew P Smeltzer; Meghan B Meadows-Taylor; Folabi Ariganjoye; Alicia Pacheco; Robert Optican; Keith Tonkin; Jeffrey Wright; Roy Fox; Thomas Callahan; Edward T Robbins; William Walsh; Philip Lammers; Shailesh Satpute; Raymond U Osarogiagbon Journal: JTO Clin Res Rep Date: 2021-07-03