Loading…

Does structural racism impact receipt of NCCN guideline-concordant breast cancer treatment?

PURPOSE Disparities in breast cancer survival remain a challenge. We aimed to analyze the effect of structural racism, as measured by the Index of Concentration at the Extremes (ICE), on receipt of National Cancer Center Network (NCCN) guideline-concordant breast cancer treatment. Methods We identif...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Breast cancer research and treatment 2024-08, Vol.206 (3), p.509-517
Main Authors: Lubarsky, Maya, Hernandez, Alexandra E, Collie, Brianna L, Westrick, Ashly C, Thompson, Cheyenne, Kesmodel, Susan B, Goel, Neha
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Citations: Items that this one cites
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:PURPOSE Disparities in breast cancer survival remain a challenge. We aimed to analyze the effect of structural racism, as measured by the Index of Concentration at the Extremes (ICE), on receipt of National Cancer Center Network (NCCN) guideline-concordant breast cancer treatment. Methods We identified patients treated at two institutions from 2005 to 2017 with stage I-IV breast cancer. Census tracts served as neighborhood proxies. Using 5-year estimates from the American Community Survey, 5 ICE variables were computed to create 5 models, controlling for economic segregation, non-Hispanic Black (NHB) segregation, NHB/economic segregation, Hispanic segregation, and Hispanic/economic segregation. Multi-level logistic regression models were used to determine the association between individual and neighborhood-level characteristics on receipt of NCCN guideline-concordant breast cancer treatment. Results 5173 patients were included: 55.2% were Hispanic, 27.5% were NHW, and 17.3% were NHB. Regardless of economic or residential segregation, a NHB patient was less likely to receive appropriate treatment [(OR) Model1 0.58 (0.45–0.74); OR Model2 0.59 (0.46–0.78); OR Model3 0.62 (0.47–0.81); OR Model4 0.53 (0.40–0.69); OR Model5 0.59(0.46–0.76); p  
ISSN:0167-6806
1573-7217
1573-7217
DOI:10.1007/s10549-024-07245-6