No abstract

Objective: Urban-rural health disparities are often attributed to the longer distances rural patients travel to receive care. However, a recent study suggests that distance to care may affect urban and rural cancer patients differentially. We examined whether this urban-rural paradox exists among patients with cervical cancer. Methods: We identified individuals diagnosed with cervical cancer from 2004–2013 using a statewide cancer registry linked to multi-payer, insurance claims. Our primary outcome was receipt of guideline-concordant care: surgery for stages IA1-IB1; external beam radiation therapy (EBRT), concomitant chemotherapy, and brachytherapy for stages IB2-IVA. We estimated risk ratios (RR) using modified Poisson regressions, stratified by urban/rural location, to examine the association between distance to nearest facility and receipt of treatment. Results: 62% of 999 cervical cancer patients received guideline-concordant care. The association between distance and receipt of care differed by type of treatment. In urban areas, cancer patients who lived ≥15 miles from the nearest surgical facility were less likely to receive primary surgical management compared to those <5 miles from the nearest surgical facility (RR: 0.77, 95% CI: 0.60–0.98). In rural areas, patients living ≥15 miles from the nearest brachytherapy facility were more likely to receive treatment compared to those <5 miles from the nearest brachytherapy facility (RR: 1.71, 95% CI: 1.14–2.58). Distance was not associated with the receipt of chemotherapy or EBRT. Conclusions: Among cervical cancer patients, there is evidence supporting the urban-rural paradox, i.e., geographic distance to cancer care facilities is not consistently associated with treatment receipt in expected or consistent ways. Healthcare systems must consider the diverse and differential barriers encountered by urban and rural residents to improve access to high quality cancer care.

Background: Although rural cancer patients encounter substantial barriers to care, they more often report receiving timely care than urban patients. We examined whether geographic distance, a contributor to urban-rural health disparities, differentially influences treatment initiation and completion among insured urban and rural cervical cancer patients.Methods: We identified women diagnosed with cervical cancer from 2004 to 2013 from a statewide cancer registry linked to multipayer, insurance claims. Primary outcomes were initiation of guideline-concordant care within 6 weeks of diagnosis and, among stage IB2-IVA cancer patients, completion of concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CCRT) in 56 days. We estimated risk ratios using modified Poisson regressions, stratified by urban/rural status, to examine the association between distance and treatment timing (initiation or completion).Results: Among 999 stage IA-IVA patients, 48% initiated guideline-concordant care within 6 weeks of diagnosis, and 37% of 492 stage IB2-IVA cancer patients completed CCRT in 56 days. In urban areas, stage IA-IVA patients who lived 15 miles from the nearest treatment facility were less likely to initiate timely treatment compared with those <5 miles [risk ratio (RR): 0.72; 95% confidence intervals (CI), 0.54-0.95]. Among IB2-IVA stage cancer patients, rural women residing 15 miles from the nearest radiation facility were more likely to complete CCRT in 56 days (RR: 2.49; 95% CI, 1.12-5.51).Conclusions: Geographic distance differentially influences the initiation and completion of treatment among urban and rural cervical cancer patients.Impact: Distance was an access barrier for insured cervical cancer patients in urban areas whereas rural patients may require more intensive outreach, support, and resources, even among those living closer to treatment.

BackgroundScreening substantially reduces cervical cancer incidence and mortality. More than half of invasive cervical cancers are attributable to infrequent screening or not screening at all. The current study, My Body My Test (MBMT), evaluates the impact of mailed kits for self-collection of samples for human papillomavirus (HPV) testing on completion of cervical cancer screening in low-income, North Carolina women overdue for cervical cancer screening.Methods/designThe study will enroll at least 510 US women aged 25–64 years who report no Pap test in the last 4 years and no HPV test in the last 6 years. We will randomize participants to an intervention or control arm. The intervention arm will receive kits to self-collect a sample at home and mail it for HPV testing. In both the intervention and control arms, participants will receive assistance in scheduling an appointment for screening in clinic. Study staff will deliver HPV self-collection results by phone and assist in scheduling participants for screening in clinic. The primary outcome is completion of cervical cancer screening. Specifically, completion of screening will be defined as screening in clinic or receipt of negative HPV self-collection results. Women with HPV-negative self-collection results will be considered screening-complete. All other participants will be considered screening-complete if they obtain co-testing or Pap test screening at a study-affiliated institution or other clinic. We will assess whether the self-collection intervention influences participants’ perceived risk of cervical cancer and whether perceived risk mediates the relationship between HPV self-collection results and subsequent screening in clinic. We also will estimate the incremental cost per woman screened of offering at-home HPV self-collection kits with scheduling assistance as compared to offering scheduling assistance alone.DiscussionIf mailed self-collection of samples for HPV testing is an effective strategy for increasing cervical cancer screening among women overdue for screening, this method has the potential to reduce cervical cancer incidence and mortality in medically underserved women at higher risk of developing cervical cancer.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT02651883, Registered on 11 January 2016.

A B S T R A C T Infections and graft-versus-host disease (GVHD) have historically resulted in high mortality among children undergoing umbilical cord blood transplantation (UCBT). However, recent advances in clinical practice have likely improved outcomes of these patients. We conducted a retrospective cohort study of children (<18 years of age) undergoing UCBT at Duke University between January 1, 1995 and December 31, 2014. We compared 2-year allcause and cause-specific mortality during 3 time periods based on year of transplantation (). We used multivariable Cox regression to identify demographic and UCBT characteristics that were associated with all-cause mortality, transplantation-related mortality, and death from invasive aspergillosis after adjustment for time period. During the 20-year study period 824 children underwent UCBT. Two-year all-cause mortality declined from 48% in 1995 to 2001 to 30% in 2008 to 2014 (P = .0002). White race and nonmalignant UCBT indications were associated with lower mortality. Black children tended to have a higher risk of death for which GVHD (18% versus 11%; P = .06) or graft failure (9% versus 3%; P = .01) were contributory than white children. Comparing 2008 to 2014 with 1995 to 2001, more than half (59%) of the reduced mortality was attributable to a reduction in infectious mortality, with 45% specifically related to reduced mortality from invasive aspergillosis. Antifungal prophylaxis with voriconazole was associated with lower mortality from invasive aspergillosis than low-dose amphotericin B lipid complex (hazard ratio, .09; 95% confidence interval, .01 to .76). With the decline in mortality from invasive aspergillosis, adenovirus and cytomegalovirus have become the most frequent infectious causes of death in children after UCBT. Advances in clinical practice over the past 20 years improved survival of children after UCBT. Reduced mortality from infections, particularly invasive aspergillosis, accounted for the largest improvement in survival and was associated with use of voriconazole for antifungal prophylaxis.