Literature DB >> 33423122

Uptake of Breast Cancer Clinical Trials at Minority Serving Cancer Centers.

Olga Kantor1,2,3, Cecilia Chang4, Katharine Yao5,6, Judy Boughey6,7, Christina Roland6,8, Amanda B Francescatti6, Sarah Blair6,9, Diana Dickson Witmer6,10, Kelly K Hunt6,8, Heidi Nelson6,7, Anna Weiss2,3,6, Tawakalitu Oseni11.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Most minorities receive cancer care at minority-serving hospitals (MSHs) that have been associated with disparate treatment between Black and White patients.
OBJECTIVE: Our aim was to examine the uptake of clinical trials that have changed axillary management in breast cancer patients at MSH and non-MSH cancer centers.
METHODS: The National Cancer Database was used to identify patients eligible for the American College of Surgeons Oncology Group Z0011 and Z1071 trials, and mastectomy patients fulfilling the European AMAROS trial. Uptake of trial results (omission of axillary lymph node dissection) was analyzed between patients treated at MSHs and non-MSHs and adjusted for patient, tumor, and facility factors. MSHs were defined as the top decile of hospitals according to the proportion of Black and Hispanic patients treated.
RESULTS: Of 7167 patients eligible for Z0011, 4546 for Z0171, and 9433 for AMAROS from 2015 to 2016, clinical trial uptake was seen in 1195 (74.6%) MSH and 4056 (72.9%) non-MSH patients (p = 0.173) for Z0011, 588 (41.9%) MSH and 1366 (43.5%) non-MSH patients for Z1071 (p = 0.302), and 272 (11.7%) MSH and 996 (14.0%) non-MSH patients (p = 0.005) for AMAROS. On adjusted analyses, MSH status was not significant for uptake of any of the three trials. Black race, socioeconomic status, and insurance were not associated with clinical trial uptake.
CONCLUSION: The uptake of three landmark clinical trials of axillary management in breast cancer was not different at MSH and non-MSH centers despite adjustment for social determinants of health. At the Commission on Cancer-accredited centers in this analysis, MSH status did not affect the uptake of evidence-based care.
© 2021. Society of Surgical Oncology.

Entities:  

Year:  2021        PMID: 33423122     DOI: 10.1245/s10434-020-09533-z

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ann Surg Oncol        ISSN: 1068-9265            Impact factor:   5.344


  3 in total

1.  Reporting of race and ethnicity in breast cancer research: room for improvement.

Authors:  Kelly W Mitchell; Lisa A Carey; Jeffrey Peppercorn
Journal:  Breast Cancer Res Treat       Date:  2009-05-15       Impact factor: 4.872

2.  Racial disparities in cancer survival among randomized clinical trials patients of the Southwest Oncology Group.

Authors:  Kathy S Albain; Joseph M Unger; John J Crowley; Charles A Coltman; Dawn L Hershman
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2009-07-07       Impact factor: 13.506

3.  The National Cancer Institute Community Cancer Centers Program (NCCCP): Sustaining Quality and Reducing Disparities in Guideline-Concordant Breast and Colon Cancer Care.

Authors:  Pamela Spain; Stephanie Teixeira-Poit; Michael T Halpern; Kathleen Castro; Irene Prabhu Das; Brenda Adjei; Rebecca Lewis; Steven B Clauser
Journal:  Oncologist       Date:  2017-05-09
  3 in total
  2 in total

1.  Optimizing Axillary Management in Clinical T1-2N0 Mastectomy Patients with Positive Sentinel Lymph Nodes.

Authors:  Olga Kantor; Jessica Means; Samantha Grossmith; Tanujit Dey; Jennifer R Bellon; Elizabeth A Mittendorf; Tari A King
Journal:  Ann Surg Oncol       Date:  2021-09-01       Impact factor: 5.344

2.  Neighborhood socioeconomic status and low-value breast cancer care.

Authors:  J C Chen; Yaming Li; James L Fisher; Oindrila Bhattacharyya; Allan Tsung; Samilia Obeng-Gyasi
Journal:  J Surg Oncol       Date:  2022-04-22       Impact factor: 2.885

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.