» Articles » PMID: 37769217

Proximity to Radiotherapy Center, Population, Average Income, and Health Insurance Status As Predictors of Cancer Mortality at the County Level in the United States

Overview
Journal JCO Glob Oncol
Specialty Oncology
Date 2023 Sep 28
PMID 37769217
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Purpose: Sufficient radiotherapy (RT) capacity is essential to delivery of high-quality cancer care. However, despite sufficient capacity, universal access is not always possible in high-income countries because of factors beyond the commonly used parameter of machines per million people. This study assesses the barriers to RT in a high-income country and how these affect cancer mortality.

Methods: This cross-sectional study used US county-level data obtained from Center for Disease Control and Prevention and the International Atomic Energy Agency Directory of Radiotherapy Centres. RT facilities in the United States were mapped using Geographic Information Systems software. Univariate analysis was used to identify whether distance to a RT center or various socioeconomic factors were predictive of all-cancer mortality-to-incidence ratio (MIR). Significant variables ( ≤ .05) on univariate analysis were included in a step-wise backward elimination method of multiple regression analysis.

Results: Thirty-one percent of US counties have at least one RT facility and 8.3% have five or more. The median linear distance from a county's centroid to the nearest RT center was 36 km, and the median county all-cancer MIR was 0.37. The amount of RT centers, linear accelerators, and brachytherapy units per 1 million people were associated with all-cancer MIR ( < .05). Greater distance to RT facilities, lower county population, lower average income per county, and higher proportion of patients without health insurance were associated with increased all-cancer MIR (-squared, 0.2113; , 94.22; < .001).

Conclusion: This analysis used unique high-quality data sets to identify significant barriers to RT access that correspond to higher cancer mortality at the county level. Geographic access, personal income, and insurance status all contribute to these concerning disparities. Efforts to address these barriers are needed.

Citing Articles

Utilization and regional disparities of radiotherapy in cancer treatment in Japan: a longitudinal study using NDB open data.

Takeda K, Umezawa R, Yamamoto T, Takahashi N, Onishi H, Jingu K J Radiat Res. 2024; 66(1):82-88.

PMID: 39724924 PMC: 11753831. DOI: 10.1093/jrr/rrae100.


Travel-Time Disparities in Access to Proton Beam Therapy for Cancer Treatment.

Burus T, VanHelene A, Rooney M, Lang Kuhs K, Christian W, McNair C JAMA Netw Open. 2024; 7(5):e2410670.

PMID: 38758559 PMC: 11102024. DOI: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2024.10670.


Hypofractionated Radiotherapy in Gynecologic Malignancies-A Peek into the Upcoming Evidence.

Amjad R, Moldovan N, Raziee H, Leung E, DSouza D, Mendez L Cancers (Basel). 2024; 16(2).

PMID: 38254851 PMC: 10814353. DOI: 10.3390/cancers16020362.

References
1.
Park H, Decker R . Disparities in radiation therapy delivery: current evidence and future directions in head and neck cancer. Cancers Head Neck. 2019; 1:5. PMC: 6457146. DOI: 10.1186/s41199-016-0005-x. View

2.
Rohlfing M, Mays A, Isom S, Waltonen J . Insurance status as a predictor of mortality in patients undergoing head and neck cancer surgery. Laryngoscope. 2017; 127(12):2784-2789. PMC: 5688011. DOI: 10.1002/lary.26713. View

3.
Chan J, Polo A, Zubizarreta E, Bourque J, Hanna T, Gaudet M . Access to radiotherapy and its association with cancer outcomes in a high-income country: Addressing the inequity in Canada. Radiother Oncol. 2019; 141:48-55. DOI: 10.1016/j.radonc.2019.09.009. View

4.
Guttmann D, Kobie J, Grover S, Lin A, Lukens J, Mitra N . National disparities in treatment package time for resected locally advanced head and neck cancer and impact on overall survival. Head Neck. 2018; 40(6):1147-1155. DOI: 10.1002/hed.25091. View

5.
Yabroff K, Washington K, Leader A, Neilson E, Mandelblatt J . Is the promise of cancer-screening programs being compromised? Quality of follow-up care after abnormal screening results. Med Care Res Rev. 2003; 60(3):294-331. DOI: 10.1177/1077558703254698. View