Lesbians and cancer: an overlooked health disparity

Objective  To evaluate the breast, cervical, ovarian, lung, and colorectal cancer literatures using a novel application of the cancer disparities grid to identify disparities along domains of the cancer continuum focusing on lesbians as a minority population. Methods  Computerized databases were searched for articles published from 1981 to present. Cumulative search results identified 51 articles related to lesbians and disparities, which were classified by domain. Results  The majority of articles identified were related to breast and cervical cancer screening. Barriers to adequate screening for both cancers include personal factors, poor patient-provider communication, and health care system factors. Tailored risk counseling has been successful in increasing lesbian’s mammography and Pap screening. Ovarian, lung, and colorectal cancer have been virtually unexplored in this population. An “Adjustment to Illness/Quality of Life” domain was added to capture literature on psychosocial aspects of cancer. Conclusions  This review revealed a lack of research for specific cancers and for specific aspects of the cancer continuum. The limited number of studies identified focused on issues related to screening/prevention in cervical and breast cancers, with almost no attention to incidence, etiology, diagnosis, treatment, survival, morbidity, or mortality. We present implications for social and public health policy, research, and prevention.     

Patient navigation across the cancer care continuum: An overview of systematic reviews and emerging literature

Patient navigation is a strategy for overcoming barriers to reduce disparities and to improve access and outcomes. The aim of this umbrella review was to identify, critically appraise, synthesize, and present the best available evidence to inform policy and planning regarding patient navigation across the cancer continuum. Systematic reviews examining navigation in cancer care were identified in the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), PubMed, Embase, Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health (CINAHL), Epistemonikos, and Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) databases and in the gray literature from January 1, 2012, to April 19, 2022. Data were screened, extracted, and appraised independently by two authors. The JBI Critical Appraisal Checklist for Systematic Review and Research Syntheses was used for quality appraisal. Emerging literature up to May 25, 2022, was also explored to capture primary research published beyond the coverage of included systematic reviews. Of the 2062 unique records identified, 61 systematic reviews were included. Fifty-four reviews were quantitative or mixed-methods reviews, reporting on the effectiveness of cancer patient navigation, including 12 reviews reporting costs or cost-effectiveness outcomes. Seven qualitative reviews explored navigation needs, barriers, and experiences. In addition, 53 primary studies published since 2021 were included. Patient navigation is effective in improving participation in cancer screening and reducing the time from screening to diagnosis and from diagnosis to treatment initiation. Emerging evidence suggests that patient navigation improves quality of life and patient satisfaction with care in the survivorship phase and reduces hospital readmission in the active treatment and survivorship care phases. Palliative care data were extremely limited. Economic evaluations from the United States suggest the potential cost-effectiveness of navigation in screening programs.     

Information needs across the colorectal cancer care continuum: scoping the literature

Because cancer care requires a multifaceted approach, providing useful and timely information to people with colorectal cancer may be fragmented and inconsistent. Our interest was in examining what has and has not captured the attention of researchers speaking to the information needs of people with colorectal cancer. We followed Arksey and O'Malley's framework for the methodology of scoping review. Focusing solely on colorectal cancer, we analysed 239 articles to get a picture of which information needs and sources of information, as well as the timing of providing information, were attended to. Treatment-related information received the most mentions (26%). Healthcare professionals (49%) were mentioned as the most likely source of information. Among articles focused on one stage of the care continuum, post-treatment (survivorship) received the most attention (16%). Only 27% of the articles consulted people with colorectal cancer and few attended to diet/nutrition and bowel management. This study examined the numerical representation of issues to which researchers attend, not the quality of the mentions. We ponder, however, on the relationship between the in/frequency of mentions and the actual information needs of people with colorectal cancer as well as the availability, sources and timing of information.     

Cost analysis of a patient navigation system to increase screening colonoscopy adherence among urban minorities

BACKGROUND:

Patient navigation (PN) is being used increasingly to help patients complete screening colonoscopy (SC) to prevent colorectal cancer. At their large, urban academic medical center with an open‐access endoscopy system, the authors previously demonstrated that PN programs produced a colonoscopy completion rate of 78.5% in a cohort of 503 patients (predominantly African Americans and Latinos with public health insurance). Very little is known about the direct costs of implementing PN programs. The objective of the current study was to perform a detailed cost analysis of PN programs at the authors' institution from an institutional perspective.

METHODS:

In 2 randomized controlled trials, average‐risk patients who were referred for SC by primary care providers were recruited for PN between May 2008 and May 2010. Patients were randomized to 1 of 4 PN groups. The cost of PN and net income to the institution were determined in a cost analysis.

RESULTS:

Among 395 patients who completed colonoscopy, 53.4% underwent SC alone, 30.1% underwent colonoscopy with biopsy, and 16.5% underwent snare polypectomy. Accounting for the average contribution margins of each procedure type, the total revenue was $95,266.00. The total cost of PN was $14,027.30. Net income was $81,238.70. In a model sample of 1000 patients, net incomes for the institutional completion rate (approximately 80%), the historic PN program (approximately 65%), and the national average (approximately 50%) were compared. The current PN program generated additional net incomes of $35,035.50 and $44,956.00, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS:

PN among minority patients with mostly public health insurance generated additional income to the institution, mainly because of increased colonoscopy completion rates. Cancer 2013. © 2012 American Cancer Society.     

Patient navigation for breast and colorectal cancer in 3 community hospital settings: An economic evaluation

BACKGROUND:

The Ralph Lauren Cancer Center implemented patient navigation programs in sites across the United States building on the model pioneered by Harold P. Freeman, MD. Patient navigation targets medically underserved with the objective of reducing the time interval between an abnormal cancer finding, diagnostic resolution, and treatment initiation. In this study, the authors assessed the incremental cost effectiveness of adding patient navigation to standard cancer care in 3 community hospitals in the United States.

METHODS:

A decision‐analytic model was used to assess the cost effectiveness of a colorectal and breast cancer patient navigation program over the period of 1 year compared with standard care. Data sources included published estimates in the literature and primary costs, aggregate patient demographics, and outcome data from 3 patient navigation programs.

RESULTS:

After 1 year, compared with standard care alone, it was estimated that offering patient navigation with standard care would allow an additional 78 of 959 individuals with an abnormal breast cancer screening and an additional 21 of 411 individuals with abnormal colonoscopies to reach timely diagnostic resolution. Without including medical treatment costs saved, the cost‐effectiveness ratio ranged from $511 to $2080 per breast cancer diagnostic resolution achieved and from $1192 to $9708 per colorectal cancer diagnostic resolution achieved.

CONCLUSIONS:

The current results indicated that implementing breast or colorectal cancer patient navigation in community hospital settings in which low‐income populations are served may be a cost‐effective addition to standard cancer care in the United States. Cancer 2012. © 2012 American Cancer Society.     

Patient navigation and activation interventions for elderly patients with cancer: A systematic review

Patient navigation (PN) and patient activation (PA) interventions are widely used to help patients with cancer to manage the disease and the care trajectory. However, the usability and impact of these interventions on older patients and their well‐being are unclear. This study aims to show which PN and PA interventions are being used and what impact they have. After systematically searching the literature, we assessed the quality of the publications we found. The publications had to involve at least a subgroup of older people with minimally one abnormal oncologic test result each, and they had to focus on PN or PA interventions. Six PA publications examined the interventions exclusively for elderly patients. Each of the 11 PN and PA publications contained at least one comment about the impact on older patients. The types of impact varied substantially, but there was scant attention to the quality of life. The type of intervention, the outcome measures and the quality of publications also varied considerably. Generally, age is not an important factor in PN and PA studies. To facilitate adjustment of navigation and activation interventions to the individual patient, more rigorous research into the impact of PN and PA interventions on older patients is necessary.     

Effectiveness of Multidimensional Cancer Survivor Rehabilitation and Cost‐Effectiveness of Cancer Rehabilitation in General: A Systematic Review

Introduction.

Many cancer survivors suffer from a combination of disease- and treatment-related morbidities and complaints after primary treatment. There is a growing evidence base for the effectiveness of monodimensional rehabilitation interventions; in practice, however, patients often participate in multidimensional programs. This study systematically reviews evidence regarding effectiveness of multidimensional rehabilitation programs for cancer survivors and cost-effectiveness of cancer rehabilitation in general.

Methods.

The published literature was systematically reviewed. Data were extracted using standardized forms and were summarized narratively.

Results.

Sixteen effectiveness and six cost-effectiveness studies were included. Multidimensional rehabilitation programs were found to be effective, but not more effective than monodimensional interventions, and not on all outcome measures. Effect sizes for quality of life were in the range of −0.12 (95% confidence interval [CI], −0.45–0.20) to 0.98 (95% CI, 0.69–1.29). Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios ranged from −€16,976, indicating cost savings, to €11,057 per quality-adjusted life year.

Conclusions.

The evidence for multidimensional interventions and the economic impact of rehabilitation studies is scarce and dominated by breast cancer studies. Studies published so far report statistically significant benefits for multidimensional interventions over usual care, most notably for the outcomes fatigue and physical functioning. An additional benefit of multidimensional over monodimensional rehabilitation was not found, but this was also sparsely reported on. Available economic evaluations assessed very different rehabilitation interventions. Yet, despite low comparability, all showed favorable cost-effectiveness ratios. Future studies should focus their designs on the comparative effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of multidimensional programs.     

Breast cancer care in the community: challenges, opportunities, and outcomes

In the USA, 80% of patients with breast cancer are treated by community breast surgeons. NCDB data indicate that there are only small differences in outcomes between lower volume cancer programs and higher volume programs. There is some evidence that breast cancer patients of high-volume breast focused surgeons may have improved outcomes. This article discusses the challenges community breast surgeons face and some ways that the quality of care could be monitored and improved. Quality reporting programs of the Commission on Cancer and Mastery of Breast Surgery Program of the American Society of Breast Surgeons are recommended as tools to track and improve outcomes in breast cancer care.     

Costs and cost effectiveness of a health care provider-directed intervention to promote colorectal cancer screening among Veterans.

PURPOSE: Colorectal cancer screening is underused, particularly in the Veterans Affairs (VA) population. In a randomized controlled trial, a health care provider-directed intervention that offered quarterly feedback to physicians on their patients' colorectal cancer screening rates led to a 9% increase in colorectal cancer screening rates among veterans. The objective of this secondary analysis was to assess the cost effectiveness of the colorectal cancer screening promotion intervention. METHODS: Providers in the intervention arm attended an educational workshop on colorectal cancer screening and received confidential feedback on individual and group-specific colorectal cancer screening rates. The primary end point was completion of colorectal cancer screening tests. Sensitivity analyses investigated cost-effectiveness estimates varying the data collection methods, costs of labor and technology, and the effectiveness of the intervention. RESULTS: Rates of colorectal cancer screening for the intervention versus control arms were 41.3% v 32.4%, respectively (P < .05). The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was dollar 978 per additional veteran screened based on feedback reports generated from manual review of records. However, if feedback reports could be generated from information technology systems, sensitivity analyses indicate that the cost-effectiveness estimate would decrease to dollar 196 per additional veteran screened. CONCLUSION: An intervention based on quarterly feedback reports to physicians improved colorectal cancer screening rates at a VA medical center. This intervention would be cost effective if relevant data could be generated by existing information technology systems. Our findings may have broad applicability because a 2005 Medicare initiative will provide the VA electronic medical record system as a free benefit to all US physicians.     

Identifying Primary Care Physicians Continuing Education Needs by Examining Clinical Practices,Attitudes, and Barriers to Screening Across Multiple Cancers

Population-based cancer screening for cervical, breast, and colorectal cancers improves patient outcomes, yet screening rates remain low for some cancers. Despite studies investigating physician perceptions and practices for screening, many have focused on individual cancers and lack primary care physicians’ (PCPs) realities around screening for multiple cancers. We surveyed 887 PCPs in British Columbia (BC) to examine practices, beliefs, barriers, and learning needs towards cancer screening across breast, cervical, colorectal, prostate, as well as hereditary predisposition to cancer. Survey results identified differences in PCPs belief in the benefit of screening for recommended and non-recommended routine cancer screening, PCPs adherence to screening guidelines for some cancers and physician comfort and patient testing requests related to physician gender for gender sensitive tests. Further, across cancers, screening barriers included patients with multiple health concerns (41%), limited time to discuss screening (36%), and lack of physician financial compensation to discuss screening (23%). The study highlighted the need for more physician education on screening programs, referral criteria, follow-up processes, and screening guidelines. Conferences (73%), self-directed (46%), small group workshops (42%), hospital rounds (41%), and online CME/CPD (39%) were highly preferred (4+5) for learning about cancer screening. The results suggest a need to improve awareness and adherence to screening guidelines and recommended practices, as well as to provide educational opportunities which address knowledge and practice gaps for physicians.     

Cost-effectiveness of breast cancer screening: Preliminary results of a systematic review of the literature

Summary There is now considerable concern that universal access to health care within realistic resource constraints requires some sort of cost-effectiveness analysis of given medical procedures and interventions. One such intervention is routine mammographic screening for breast cancer. Here, we report preliminary results from an ongoing project to conduct a systematic and comprehensive review and comparison of the published cost-effectiveness analyses of screening for the early detection of breast cancer. We examine 16 such studies, and compare two studies in detail to explain how differences in assumptions and in consideration of down-stream effects have caused the published results for apparently comparable breast cancer screening programs to span a broad range.This minisymposium was presented December 8, 1992, at the annual San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium, and was sponsored by educational grants from Amgen and from Bristol-Myers Oncology Division.     

Colorectal cancer is an Ambulatory Care Sensitive Condition

Ambulatory Care Sensitive Conditions (ACSC) are conditions where the provision of ambulatory care may affect the probability of hospitalization or the severity of the disease at the time of hospitalization. Population-based measurement of ACSCs can focus attention on aspects of ambulatory care that merit strengthening to improve access, quality, or patient compliance to achieve better outcomes and reduce costs. If colorectal cancer was added to the list of ACSCs, it would highlight the continuum of care that starts in the ambulatory setting and includes risk assessment as well as access to colonoscopy, which is the only means of adenoma removal after a positive screen. Each link in the continuum of care can increase or reduce the rates of colorectal cancer incidence and mortality at the local and national levels. Employing colorectal cancer as an ACSC at the hospital level or state level can provoke policy makers and managers to examine these links for gaps and weaknesses that merit attention and may be addressed.     

Care delivery,patient experiences,and health outcomes among sexual and gender minority patients with cancer and survivors: A scoping review

Sexual and gender minorities (SGMs) face a disproportionate burden of cancer, yet little is known about the experiences and specific needs of these underserved populations in cancer care delivery. The authors conducted a scoping review to characterize the literature on cancer care delivery, health outcomes, and health care experiences for patients with cancer and survivors identifying as SGM. In total, 1176 peer-reviewed citations were identified after a systematic search of the PubMed/Medline, PsycInfo, Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), and Web of Sciences databases without restriction on publication date. The details captured included study aims, design, population, cancer site, and main findings. Thirty-seven studies published from 1998 to 2017 met the study criteria. Most studies were conducted in the post-treatment survivorship phase of the continuum (n = 30), and breast cancer was the most common cancer site (n = 20). There were only 2 intervention studies. The studies reviewed were classified under the following areas of focus: 1) disclosure of sexual orientation and gender identity, 2) quality of care, 3) psychosocial impact of/ adjustment to cancer, 4) social support, 5) sexual functioning, and 6) health risks/health behavior. Very little research reported an assessment of gender minority status or included a focus on gender minorities (n = 7). This review revealed substantial research gaps given a lack of population-based data and small sample sizes, likely related to the absence of systematic collection of sexual orientation and gender identity information in the cancer care context. Deficient research in this area likely perpetuates health disparities. Further research is needed to identify and remove the barriers to delivering high-quality care to SGM individuals with cancer.     

Multilevel research and the challenges of implementing genomic medicine

Advances in genomics and related fields promise a new era of personalized medicine in the cancer care continuum. Nevertheless, there are fundamental challenges in integrating genomic medicine into cancer practice. We explore how multilevel research can contribute to implementation of genomic medicine. We first review the rapidly developing scientific discoveries in this field and the paucity of current applications that are ready for implementation in clinical and public health programs. We then define a multidisciplinary translational research agenda for successful integration of genomic medicine into policy and practice and consider challenges for successful implementation. We illustrate the agenda using the example of Lynch syndrome testing in newly diagnosed cases of colorectal cancer and cascade testing in relatives. We synthesize existing information in a framework for future multilevel research for integrating genomic medicine into the cancer care continuum.     

Health-Related Quality of Life in Patients with Breast Cancer in Latin America and the Caribbean: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background and Objectives

Breast cancer (BC) is the most common cancer in women. It imposes a huge disease burden and a significant impact on health-related quality of life (HRQoL). Our study focused on HRQoL of patients with BC in Latin America and the Caribbean (LAC). We conducted a systematic review to identify relevant articles published between 2008 and August 2018. We conducted several meta-analyses and subgroup analyses by country, disease stage, and instrument used (Prospective Register Of Systematic Reviews registration number: CRD42018106835).

Results

From 2,265 initial references, we finally included 75 articles (8,806 participants) that assessed HRQoL. The European Organization for the Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire C30 and B23 modules (34 studies; 8 countries; 4,866 participants) were the most used instruments, followed by the Short Form 36-item, the abbreviated version of the World Health Organization Quality of Life instrument, and the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy – Breast instrument. Only four studies reported specific HRQoL data of patients with metastatic disease. Half the studies were rated as having moderate quality (38/75), and 38% (29/75) as high quality. We identified substantial heterogeneity. As expected, the meta-analyses revealed that patients with metastatic disease reported lower HRQoL values and high symptom burden compared with patients at earlier stages. Similar results can be observed when we compared patients with early breast cancer in active treatment phases versus those in follow-up.

Conclusion

This study provides a synthesis of breast cancer HRQoL reported in LAC and exposes existing evidence gaps. Patients with BC in active treatment or with metastatic disease had worse HRQoL compared with survivors during the follow-up period.

Implications for Practice

This systematic review provides an exhaustive synthesis of breast cancer health-related quality of life in women in the Latin American and Caribbean region. Patients with breast cancer in active treatment or with metastatic disease had worse health-related quality of life compared with survivors during the different follow-up periods. This study also shows important evidence and methods gaps that can help inform future research.

     

Evaluating the scientific basis of quality indicators in colorectal cancer care: A systematic review

AimIn colorectal cancer care, many indicators for assessment and improvement of quality of care are being used. These quality indicators serve as national and international benchmarks to compare health care on hospital and patient level. However, the scientific basis of these indicators is often unclear. Therefore, the aim of this systematic review is to examine reported quality indicators used in multidisciplinary colorectal cancer care and categorise these indicators based on scientific evidence.MethodsWe searched PubMed from 2005 to 2015 for original articles reporting on development, evaluation or validation of quality indicators in colorectal cancer care. Included articles were categorised in consensus-based, evidence-based and validation cohort studies. Extracted quality indicators were divided into structure, process and outcome indicators and grouped per discipline(s) involved.ResultsFrom 1163 studies, 41 articles were included: 12 (29%) consensus-based, 7 (17%) evidence-based and 22 (54%) validation cohort studies. In total, we identified 389 reported quality indicators: consensus-based (n = 349), evidence-based (n = 7) and validation (n = 33), respectively. Of all reported indicators, 45% (n = 186) concerned surgical items. The vast majority were process indicators (n = 315; 81%) and the remaining outcome (n = 57; 15%) or structure measurements (n = 17; 4%). Only 5 indicators were reported in the majority (≥7/12 articles) of consensus-based papers and 7 indicators were successfully validated.ConclusionsThere is an abundance of reported colorectal cancer quality indicators, of which the majority are surgical, consensus-based process measures, which have not been validated in cohort studies. There is a need for international consensus on a limited evidence-based data set of validated quality indicators, with a focus on outcome indicators.     

Social disparities across the continuum of colorectal cancer: a systematic review

Objective:The purpose of this review is to evaluate the published literature to assess social inequalities in colorectal cancer using the cancer disparities grid. Methods: Three computerized databases were searched from January 1990 to January 2004 to identify published English language articles that collected data from study participants living in the United States. Abstracts were reviewed and articles that dealt with social inequality and colorectal cancer were selected. A total of 46 articles were identified and classified into the appropriate cell of the cancer disparities grid. Results: The majority of research identified for the grid has focused primarily in one domain of inequality, race/ethnicity and racism, and within one column of the cancer continuum, cancer screening. About one-third of the articles focused on multiple aspects of social inequalities. There were few or no published research articles within many of the domains of social inequality along the continuum of colorectal cancer prevention, treatment, and outcomes. Conclusions: This review found only a modest amount of research has been conducted that has examined the influence of social inequalities on colorectal cancer. Findings suggest that a multidisciplinary approach is needed to measure and remedy these social inequalities.Address correspondence to: Richard C. Palmer, DFCI-CCBR, 44 Binney Street, Smith 272, Boston, MA 02115, USA; Ph.: 617-632-4223; Fax: 617-632-3161; e-mail: richard_palmer@dfci.harvard.edu