社区层面的社会脆弱性与癌症幸存者讨论和参与临床试验的关系

IF 4.7 3区 医学 Q1 ONCOLOGY JCO oncology practice Pub Date : 2024-08-29 DOI:10.1200/OP.24.00206
Rishi R Sekar, Avinash Maganty, Kristian D Stensland, Lindsey A Herrel
{"title":"社区层面的社会脆弱性与癌症幸存者讨论和参与临床试验的关系","authors":"Rishi R Sekar, Avinash Maganty, Kristian D Stensland, Lindsey A Herrel","doi":"10.1200/OP.24.00206","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Community factors and structural barriers may contribute to disparities and underrepresentation in cancer clinical trials. We evaluate the influence of community-level social determinants of health, as measured by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Social Vulnerability Index (SVI), on disparities in cancer clinical trial discussion and participation.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We performed a cross-sectional analysis of the 2021 Health Information National Trends Survey-SEER, a representative survey of cancer survivors sampled from three SEER registries. The primary outcomes included patient-reported clinical trial discussion and participation. The primary exposure was county-level SVI, linked to each survey respondent by ZIP code of residence and categorized into quintiles. Survey-weighted bivariate comparisons and multivariable logistic regression were performed to evaluate the association between SVI and clinical trial discussion and participation, adjusting for age, sex, race and ethnicity, education, income, and cancer stage.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We identified 1,220 respondents residing in 153 counties with a median SVI of 0.41 (IQR, 0.27-0.62), representing a population of over 400,000 cancer survivors on weighted analysis. Of the cohort, 15.1% reported clinical trial discussion and 7.7% reported clinical trial participation. Patients who are most socially vulnerable (fifth quintile of SVI) had significantly lower odds of clinical trial discussion (odds ratio [OR], 0.36 [95% CI, 0.15 to 0.87]; <i>P</i> = .02) and clinical trial participation (OR, 0.15 [95% CI, 0.03 to 0.75]; <i>P</i> = .02) compared with patients who are least socially vulnerable (first quintile of SVI).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>These findings suggest interventions to identify socially vulnerable communities for expansion of clinical trial opportunities and infrastructure may be an impactful strategy toward improving diversity and representation in cancer clinical trials.</p>","PeriodicalId":14612,"journal":{"name":"JCO oncology practice","volume":" ","pages":"OP2400206"},"PeriodicalIF":4.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Association of Community-Level Social Vulnerability With Clinical Trial Discussion and Participation Among Cancer Survivors.\",\"authors\":\"Rishi R Sekar, Avinash Maganty, Kristian D Stensland, Lindsey A Herrel\",\"doi\":\"10.1200/OP.24.00206\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Community factors and structural barriers may contribute to disparities and underrepresentation in cancer clinical trials. We evaluate the influence of community-level social determinants of health, as measured by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Social Vulnerability Index (SVI), on disparities in cancer clinical trial discussion and participation.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We performed a cross-sectional analysis of the 2021 Health Information National Trends Survey-SEER, a representative survey of cancer survivors sampled from three SEER registries. The primary outcomes included patient-reported clinical trial discussion and participation. The primary exposure was county-level SVI, linked to each survey respondent by ZIP code of residence and categorized into quintiles. Survey-weighted bivariate comparisons and multivariable logistic regression were performed to evaluate the association between SVI and clinical trial discussion and participation, adjusting for age, sex, race and ethnicity, education, income, and cancer stage.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We identified 1,220 respondents residing in 153 counties with a median SVI of 0.41 (IQR, 0.27-0.62), representing a population of over 400,000 cancer survivors on weighted analysis. Of the cohort, 15.1% reported clinical trial discussion and 7.7% reported clinical trial participation. Patients who are most socially vulnerable (fifth quintile of SVI) had significantly lower odds of clinical trial discussion (odds ratio [OR], 0.36 [95% CI, 0.15 to 0.87]; <i>P</i> = .02) and clinical trial participation (OR, 0.15 [95% CI, 0.03 to 0.75]; <i>P</i> = .02) compared with patients who are least socially vulnerable (first quintile of SVI).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>These findings suggest interventions to identify socially vulnerable communities for expansion of clinical trial opportunities and infrastructure may be an impactful strategy toward improving diversity and representation in cancer clinical trials.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":14612,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"JCO oncology practice\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"OP2400206\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-29\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"JCO oncology practice\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1200/OP.24.00206\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ONCOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JCO oncology practice","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1200/OP.24.00206","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:社区因素和结构性障碍可能会导致癌症临床试验中的差异和代表性不足。我们评估了由美国疾病控制和预防中心社会脆弱性指数(SVI)衡量的社区层面的健康社会决定因素对癌症临床试验讨论和参与差异的影响:我们对 2021 年健康信息全国趋势调查--SEER 进行了横断面分析,这是一项从三个 SEER 登记处抽样调查癌症幸存者的代表性调查。主要结果包括患者报告的临床试验讨论和参与情况。主要暴露是县级 SVI,通过居住地的邮政编码与每位调查对象相关联,并分为五等分。在对年龄、性别、种族和民族、教育程度、收入和癌症分期进行调整后,进行了调查加权二元比较和多变量逻辑回归,以评估 SVI 与临床试验讨论和参与之间的关联:我们确定了居住在 153 个县的 1,220 名受访者,他们的 SVI 中位数为 0.41(IQR,0.27-0.62),根据加权分析,他们代表了超过 400,000 名癌症幸存者。在这些人群中,15.1% 的人报告了临床试验讨论情况,7.7% 的人报告了临床试验参与情况。与社会脆弱性最低的患者(SVI 的第五个五分位数)相比,社会脆弱性最高的患者(SVI 的第五个五分位数)进行临床试验讨论(几率比 [OR],0.36 [95% CI,0.15 至 0.87];P = .02)和参与临床试验(OR,0.15 [95% CI,0.03 至 0.75];P = .02)的几率明显较低:这些研究结果表明,为扩大临床试验机会和基础设施而对社会弱势群体进行识别的干预措施,可能是提高癌症临床试验多样性和代表性的有效策略。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Association of Community-Level Social Vulnerability With Clinical Trial Discussion and Participation Among Cancer Survivors.

Purpose: Community factors and structural barriers may contribute to disparities and underrepresentation in cancer clinical trials. We evaluate the influence of community-level social determinants of health, as measured by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Social Vulnerability Index (SVI), on disparities in cancer clinical trial discussion and participation.

Methods: We performed a cross-sectional analysis of the 2021 Health Information National Trends Survey-SEER, a representative survey of cancer survivors sampled from three SEER registries. The primary outcomes included patient-reported clinical trial discussion and participation. The primary exposure was county-level SVI, linked to each survey respondent by ZIP code of residence and categorized into quintiles. Survey-weighted bivariate comparisons and multivariable logistic regression were performed to evaluate the association between SVI and clinical trial discussion and participation, adjusting for age, sex, race and ethnicity, education, income, and cancer stage.

Results: We identified 1,220 respondents residing in 153 counties with a median SVI of 0.41 (IQR, 0.27-0.62), representing a population of over 400,000 cancer survivors on weighted analysis. Of the cohort, 15.1% reported clinical trial discussion and 7.7% reported clinical trial participation. Patients who are most socially vulnerable (fifth quintile of SVI) had significantly lower odds of clinical trial discussion (odds ratio [OR], 0.36 [95% CI, 0.15 to 0.87]; P = .02) and clinical trial participation (OR, 0.15 [95% CI, 0.03 to 0.75]; P = .02) compared with patients who are least socially vulnerable (first quintile of SVI).

Conclusion: These findings suggest interventions to identify socially vulnerable communities for expansion of clinical trial opportunities and infrastructure may be an impactful strategy toward improving diversity and representation in cancer clinical trials.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.40
自引率
7.50%
发文量
518
期刊最新文献
Contextual Framework for Understanding Treatment De-Escalation in Patients With Breast Cancer. Reply to: The Value of Offering Oncofertility Counseling in Young Patients With Newly Diagnosed Cancer Is Unquestionable. The Value of Offering Oncofertility Counseling in Young Patients With Newly Diagnosed Cancer Is Unquestionable. Systemic Therapy for Small Cell Lung Cancer: ASCO Guideline Rapid Recommendation Update Clinical Insights. Clinical Relevance of Intensive Laboratory Monitoring With Standard Venetoclax Ramp-Up for Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia: A Real-World Experience.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1