Cancer journal最新文献

Abstract: Access to and participation in cancer clinical trials determine whether such data are applicable, feasible, and generalizable among populations. The lack of inclusion of low-income and marginalized populations limits generalizability of the critical data guiding novel therapeutics and interventions used globally. Such lack of cancer clinical trial equity is troubling, considering that the populations frequently excluded from these trials are those with disproportionately higher cancer morbidity and mortality rates. There is an urgency to increase representation of marginalized populations to ensure that effective treatments are developed and equitably applied. Efforts to ameliorate these clinical trial inclusion disparities are met with a slew of multifactorial and multilevel challenges. We aim to review these challenges at the patient, clinician, system, and policy levels. We also highlight and propose solutions to inform future efforts to achieve cancer health equity.

Abstract: This chapter will discuss (1) the rationale for physician workforce diversity and inclusion in oncology; (2) current and historical physician workforce demographic trends in oncology, including workforce data at various training and career levels, such as graduate medical education and as academic faculty or practicing physicians; (3) reported barriers and challenges to diversity and inclusion in oncology, such as exposure, access, preparation, mentorship, socioeconomic burdens, and interpersonal, structural, systemic bias; and (4) potential interventions and evidence-based solutions to increase diversity, equity, and inclusion and mitigate bias in the oncology physician workforce.

Abstract: Marginalized populations, including racial and ethnic minorities, have historically faced significant barriers to accessing quality health care because of structural racism and implicit bias. A brief review and analysis of past and historic and current policies demonstrate that structural racism and implicit bias continue to underscore a health system characterized by unequal access and distribution of health care resources. Although advances in cancer care have led to decreased incidence and mortality, not all populations benefit. New policies must explicitly seek to eliminate disparities and drive equity for historically marginalized populations to improve access and outcomes.

Abstract: The United States has seen a 33% decline in age-adjusted cancer mortality since 1991. Despite this achievement, the United States has some of the greatest health disparities of any developed nation. US government policies are increasingly directed toward reducing health disparities and promoting health equity. These policies govern the conduct of research, cancer prevention, access, and payment for care. Although implementation of policies has played a significant role in the successes of cancer control, inconsistent implementation of policy has resulted in divergent outcomes; poorly designed or inadequately implemented policies have hindered progress in reducing cancer death rates and, in certain cases, exacerbated existing disparities. Examining policies affecting cancer control in the United States and realizing their unintended consequences are crucial in addressing cancer inequities.

Abstract: Gynecologic cancer disparities have different trends by cancer type and by sociodemographic/economic factors. We highlight disparities in the United States arising due to poor delivery of cancer care across the continuum from primary prevention, detection, and diagnosis through treatment and identify opportunities to eliminate/reduce disparities to achieve cancer health equity. Our review documents the persistent racial and ethnic disparities in cervical, ovarian, and uterine cancer outcomes, with Black patients experiencing the worst outcomes, and notes literature investigating social determinants of health, particularly access to care. Although timely delivery of screening and diagnostic evaluation is of paramount importance for cervical cancer, efforts for ovarian and uterine cancer need to focus on timely recognition of symptoms, diagnostic evaluation, and delivery of guideline-concordant cancer treatment, including tumor biomarker and somatic/germline genetic testing.

Abstract: Disparities in outcomes and persistent barriers to adequate care in colorectal cancer are reflective of a system that has failed to achieve the ideals of health equity and health justice. In this review, we discuss that although much research has been done to improve upon gaps in screening, treatment, and supportive care in colorectal cancer, a concerted effort across multiple research, regulatory, and funding stakeholders with community-level organizations is essential in building a self-sustained system that effectively achieves health equity outcomes. We also highlight several examples of novel community-based interventions along the continuum of cancer care that demonstrate the potential of what can be accomplished when we invest in scaling up small-scale solutions to the state and national levels and offer ways in which stakeholders and the community may mutually benefit through a system of incentives, self-assessment tools, and attainable metrics.

Abstract: Because of diversities and disparities, lung cancer incidence and mortality rates among minorities are disproportionate compared with non-Hispanic White (NHW) populations. This review focuses on the disparities in lung cancer screening, diagnosis, treatment, and outcomes that minorities, mainly Hispanic and Black, experience compared with NHW populations. Despite efforts such as improving the eligibility criteria for screening to improve lung cancer survival rates, disparities persist, particularly among minority populations. However, the "Hispanic Paradox" describes the lower incidence and better survival rates observed in Hispanics compared with other ethnic groups best explained by possible contributions such as genetics and other factors such as dietary habits. Disparities in screening, particularly among underrepresented populations, are frequently explained by cultural, socioeconomic, and health care access barriers. There are also disparities in receiving appropriate treatment, such as surgical treatment, with fewer Hispanics and Blacks undergoing surgery than NHW individuals, resulting in lower overall survival rates. In addition, the prevalence of biomarker testing varies by racial and ethnic groups, influencing personalized treatment plans and outcomes. Finally, because of genetic and social determinants of health, the clinical outcomes of targeted therapy and immunotherapy may differ among minority populations. Identifying and addressing social determinants of health in real time are a "must" to have a significant impact in reducing lung cancer disparities. A comprehensive and multifaceted strategy is required to rectify disparities in cancer treatment. This strategy includes increasing levels of awareness and education, reducing financial and access barriers, and promoting increased diversity in clinical trial recruitment. By effectively addressing these complex challenges, the objective of providing equitable cancer care to all patients, regardless of race or ethnicity, can be achieved. To identify and address disparities, heightened awareness and education are essential. Access to health care is ensured by reducing financial and access barriers. Finally, increased diversity in clinical trial recruitment advances the generalizability of findings and promotes equitable representation of all racial and ethnic groups, resulting in improved outcomes for all patients.

Abstract: Cancer continues to be the second most common cause of death in the United States. Racially and ethnically minoritized populations continue to experience disparities in cancer prevention compared with majority populations. Multilevel interventions-from policy, communities, health care institutions, clinical teams, families, and individuals-may be uniquely suited to reducing health disparities through behavioral risk factor modification in these populations. The aim of this article is to provide a brief overview of the evidence for primary prevention among racially and ethnically minoritized subpopulations in the United States. We focus on the epidemiology of tobacco use, obesity, diet and physical activity, alcohol use, sun exposure, and smoking, as well as increasing uptake of the Human Papillomavirus Vaccine (HPV), as mutable behavioral risk factors. We describe interventions at the policy level, including raising excise taxes on tobacco products; within communities and with community partners, for safe greenways and parks, and local healthful food; health care institutions, with reminder systems for HPV vaccinations; among clinicians, by screening for alcohol use and providing tailored weight reduction approaches; families, with HPV education; and among individuals, routinely using sun protection. A multilevel approach to primary prevention of cancer can modify many of the risk factors in racially and ethnically minoritized populations for whom cancer is already a burden.

Purpose: Racial disparities in outcomes of breast cancer in the United States have widened over more than 3 decades, driven by complex biologic and social factors. In this review, we summarize the biological and social narratives that have shaped breast cancer disparities research across different scientific disciplines in the past, explore the underappreciated but crucial ways in which these 2 strands of the breast cancer story are interwoven, and present 5 key strategies for creating transformative interdisciplinary research to achieve equity in breast cancer treatment and outcomes.

Design: We first review the key differences in tumor biology in the United States between patients racialized as Black versus White, including the overrepresentation of triple-negative breast cancer and differences in tumor histologic and molecular features by race for hormone-sensitive disease. We then summarize key social factors at the interpersonal, institutional, and social structural levels that drive inequitable treatment. Next, we explore how biologic and social determinants are interwoven and interactive, including historical and contemporary structural factors that shape the overrepresentation of triple-negative breast cancer among Black Americans, racial differences in tumor microenvironment, and the complex interplay of biologic and social drivers of difference in outcomes of hormone receptor positive disease, including utilization and effectiveness of endocrine therapies and the role of obesity. Finally, we present 5 principles to increase the impact and productivity of breast cancer equity research.

Results: We find that social and biologic drivers of breast cancer disparities are often cyclical and are found at all levels of scientific investigation from cells to society. To break the cycle and effect change, we must acknowledge and measure the role of structural racism in breast cancer outcomes; frame biologic, psychosocial, and access factors as interwoven via mechanisms of cumulative stress, inflammation, and immune modulation; take responsibility for the impact of representativeness (or the lack thereof) in genomic and decision modeling on the ability to accurately predict the outcomes of Black patients; create research that incorporates the perspectives of people of color from inception to implementation; and rigorously evaluate innovations in equitable cancer care delivery and health policies.

Conclusions: Innovative, cross-disciplinary research across the biologic and social sciences is crucial to understanding and eliminating disparities in breast cancer outcomes.

Abstract: Social risk factors play an important role in minority health and cancer health disparities. Exposure to stress and stress responses are important social factors that are now included in conceptual models of cancer health disparities. This report summarizes results from studies that examined stress exposure and responses among African Americans. Data from studies that were conducted as part of a transdisciplinary and translational research center are also presented to provide additional insight about the nature of racial differences in specific stressors among African American and White prostate cancer patients.