| Literature DB >> 33061996 |
Julia Kravchenko1, Igor Akushevich2, Sung Han Rhew3, Pankaj Agarwal1, H Kim Lyerly1,4.
Abstract
The residents of southeastern North Carolina (NC) are exposed to multiple socioeconomic and environmental risk factors and have higher mortality rates for a number of diseases. Uterine cancer mortality is known to vary dramatically by race, so we analyzed uterine cancer mortality in populations defined by zip codes in this area to investigate the contributions of various environmental risk factors to race-specific disease patterns. Methods. Zip code specific mortality and hospital admissions for uterine cancer from 2007 to 2013 were analyzed using the NC State Center for Health Statistics data and the Inpatient Database of the Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project datafiles, respectively. Results were adjusted for age, income, education, health insurance coverage, prevalence of current smokers, and density of primary care providers. Results. Uterine cancer mortality rates were generally higher in African American (32.5/100,000, 95% CI = 18.9-46.1) compared to White (19.6/100,000, 95% CI = 12.3-26.9) females. Odds ratios (ORs) of uterine cancer death were higher in White females (OR = 2.27, p < 0.0001) residing within zip codes with hog concentrated animal feeding operations (CAFOs) (hog density >215 hogs/km2) than in White females residing in non-CAFO communities. African American females living near CAFOs had less pronounced increase of uterine cancer death (OR = 1.08, p=0.7657). Conclusion. White females living in adjacent to hog CAFOs areas of southeastern NC have lower rates of mortality from uterine cancer than African American females, but they have higher odds of death compared to their counterparts living in other NC areas. African American females living near CAFOs also have modest increases from their high baseline mortality. While the observed associations do not prove a causation, improving access to screening and medical care is important to mitigate this health issues in southeastern NC.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2020 PMID: 33061996 PMCID: PMC7545445 DOI: 10.1155/2020/6734031
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Environ Public Health ISSN: 1687-9805
Figure 1Locations of NC zip codes from the study and control groups# (#NC zip codes with the density of hogs >215 hogs/km2 and NC zip codes without registered at the DWR hog farms, respectively. Additionally, NC zip codes with the density of hogs ≤215 hogs/km2 are shown. Black dots represent locations of hog farms registered at the DWR).
Demographic and socioeconomic characteristics of the study group and control group#, 2007–2013.
| Characteristics | Study group | Control group |
|---|---|---|
| Race (%) | ||
| White | 57.6% | 73.1% |
| African American | 32.7% | 20.0% |
| American Indian | 4.2% | 0.8% |
| Asian | 0.4% | 2.5% |
| Others | 5.3% | 3.5% |
|
| ||
| Age structure of female population (%) | ||
| 0–9 years old | 13.0% | 12.4% |
| 10–19 years old | 13.5% | 12.8% |
| 20–44 years old | 31.1% | 33.8% |
| 45–64 years old | 26.6% | 26.4% |
| 65+ years old | 15.9% | 14.6% |
|
| ||
| Median household income (the U.S. dollars) | $36520 | $46414 |
| Bachelor or higher degree education (%) | 11.1% | 23.5% |
| Number of primary care providers (per 100,000 population) | 51 | 77 |
| Percentage of uninsured individuals | 18.5% | 17.8% |
| Smokers prevalence among those aged 24+ years old (%) | 25.9% | 24.0% |
p < 0.05 compared to the control group; p < 0.001 compared to the control group. #NC zip codes with the density of hogs >215 hogs/km2 and NC zip codes without registered at the DWR hog farms, respectively.
Uterine cancer in the study and control groups#: mortality and hospital admission rates, 2007–2013.
| Outcome | Race | Study group | Control group |
|---|---|---|---|
| Death rate | African American | 32.5a (18.9–46.1)b | 24.4 (20.1–28.7) |
| White | 19.6 (12.3–26.9) | 9.7 (8.6–10.8) | |
|
| |||
| Hospital admissions rate | African American | 63.5 (44.3–82.7) | 40.9 (35.4–46.5) |
| White | 44.1 (33.2–55.0) | 34.0 (31.9–36.1) | |
aRates are calculated per 100000; #NC zip codes with the density of hogs >215 hogs/km2 and NC zip codes without registered at the DWR hog farms, respectively; b95% CIs are shown in the parentheses.
Death and hospital admission odds ratiosa (ORs) of females with uterine cancer, 2007–2013.
| Outcome | Type of adjustment | Race | OR |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Death | Age-adjusted | African American | 1.25 | 0.3321 |
| White | 1.71# | 0.0069 | ||
| Multivariableb | African American | 1.08 | 0.7657 | |
| White | 2.27# | <0.0001 | ||
|
| ||||
| Hospital admissions | Age-adjusted | African American | 1.85# | 0.0003 |
| White | 1.03 | 0.8154 | ||
| Multivariable | African American | 1.89# | 0.0013 | |
| White | 1.03 | 0.8158 | ||
aControl group was a referent group; analysis is adjusted by age, income, education, health insurance, prevalence of current smokers, and number of primary care providers; #remains significant under Bonferroni correction for multiple comparisons.
DiSCa analysis: death ORs within different distances from hog CAFOs in NC; multivariable analysisb, 2007–2013.
| Race | Distance from the CAFO | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2 km | 5 km | 10 km | 20 km | |
| White | 1.65#, | 1.22#, | 1.11#, | 1.07#, |
| African American | 1.38, | 1.09, | 1.04, | 1.02, |
aDistance from the source of potential contamination; banalysis adjusted by age, income, education, health insurance, prevalence of current smokers, and availability of primary care providers; #remains significant under Bonferroni correction for multiple comparisons.
Analysis in the study and matched groups A and B#: uterine cancer mortality and hospital admission ratesa, 2007–2013.
| Outcome | Race | Study group | Matched group A | Matched group B |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mortality | White | 19.6 (12.4–26.9)b | 11.6 (6.8–16.5) | 9.5 (4.5–14.4) |
| African American | 32.5 (18.9–46.1) | 26.2 (15.0–37.5) | 36.8 (21.8–51.8) | |
|
| ||||
| Hospital admissions | White | 44.1 (33.2–55.0) | 34.5 (25.9–43.1) | 30.3 (21.1–39.4) |
| African American | 63.5 (44.3–82.7) | 41.8 (27.8–55.9) | 35.3 (20.6–50.1) | |
#Southeastern NC zip codes with >215 hogs/km2 (the study group) and NC zip codes without hog CAFOs matched by demographic characteristics such as the percentage of African Americans and percentage of children and adults aged 65+ in population, and median household income (matched group A) and additionally matched by the percentage of the residents aged 25+ with bachelor's or higher degree (matched group B); aage-adjusted rates (per 100000) among females aged 65+; b95% CIs are shown in the parentheses.