Proximity to cancer rehabilitation and exercise oncology by geography, race, and socioeconomic status.
equality, health equity, oncology, rehabilitation
exercise
social determinants of health
Journal
Cancer
ISSN: 1097-0142
Titre abrégé: Cancer
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 0374236
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
22 Sep 2024
22 Sep 2024
Historique:
revised:
22
06
2024
received:
05
05
2024
accepted:
12
07
2024
medline:
22
9
2024
pubmed:
22
9
2024
entrez:
22
9
2024
Statut:
aheadofprint
Résumé
Cancer rehabilitation and exercise oncology (CR/EO) have documented benefits for people living with and beyond cancer. The authors examined proximity to CR/EO programs across the United States with respect to population density, race and ethnicity, socioeconomic status, and cancer incidence and mortality rates. This cross-sectional study was conducted in 2022-2023. Online searches were initiated to identify CR/EO programs. Geocoding was used to obtain latitudinal and longitudinal geospatial coordinates. Demographic data were abstracted from the 2020 5-year American Community Survey. Cancer incidence and mortality data were obtained from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. US 2013 Rural-Urban Continuum Code (RUCC) classification was used to define counties as either urban (RUCC 1-3) or rural (RUCC 4-9). Multivariable logistic regression was used to evaluate the association between being far from a program and census-tract level factors. In total, 2133 CR/EO programs were identified nationwide. The distance from a program increased with decreasing population density: rural tracts were 17.68 ± 0.24 miles farther from a program compared with urban tracts (p < .001). Program proximity decreased as the neighborhood deprivation index increased (p < .001). Exercise oncology programs were less common than cancer rehabilitation programs in tracts with a larger proportion of minority residents (p < .001). Prior research has documented that underrepresented populations have worse cancer-related symptoms and higher cancer mortality. Herein, the authors document their findings that these same populations are less likely to have proximity to CR/EO programs, which are associated with improved cancer-related symptoms and cancer mortality outcomes. To realize the positive outcomes from CR/EO programming, efforts must focus on supporting expanded programming and sustainable payment for these services.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Cancer rehabilitation and exercise oncology (CR/EO) have documented benefits for people living with and beyond cancer. The authors examined proximity to CR/EO programs across the United States with respect to population density, race and ethnicity, socioeconomic status, and cancer incidence and mortality rates.
METHODS
METHODS
This cross-sectional study was conducted in 2022-2023. Online searches were initiated to identify CR/EO programs. Geocoding was used to obtain latitudinal and longitudinal geospatial coordinates. Demographic data were abstracted from the 2020 5-year American Community Survey. Cancer incidence and mortality data were obtained from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. US 2013 Rural-Urban Continuum Code (RUCC) classification was used to define counties as either urban (RUCC 1-3) or rural (RUCC 4-9). Multivariable logistic regression was used to evaluate the association between being far from a program and census-tract level factors.
RESULTS
RESULTS
In total, 2133 CR/EO programs were identified nationwide. The distance from a program increased with decreasing population density: rural tracts were 17.68 ± 0.24 miles farther from a program compared with urban tracts (p < .001). Program proximity decreased as the neighborhood deprivation index increased (p < .001). Exercise oncology programs were less common than cancer rehabilitation programs in tracts with a larger proportion of minority residents (p < .001).
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
Prior research has documented that underrepresented populations have worse cancer-related symptoms and higher cancer mortality. Herein, the authors document their findings that these same populations are less likely to have proximity to CR/EO programs, which are associated with improved cancer-related symptoms and cancer mortality outcomes. To realize the positive outcomes from CR/EO programming, efforts must focus on supporting expanded programming and sustainable payment for these services.
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Subventions
Organisme : American Cancer Society
ID : CRP-22-081-01-CTPS
Informations de copyright
© 2024 The Author(s). Cancer published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American Cancer Society.
Références
Campbell KL, Winters‐Stone KM, Wiskemann J, et al. Exercise guidelines for cancer survivors: consensus statement from International Multidisciplinary Roundtable. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2019;51(11):2375‐2390. doi:10.1249/mss.0000000000002116
Rock CL, Thomson CA, Sullivan KR, et al. American Cancer Society nutrition and physical activity guideline for cancer survivors. CA Cancer J Clin. 2022;72(3):230‐262. doi:10.3322/caac.21719
Ligibel JA, Pierce LJ, Bender CM, et al. Attention to diet, exercise, and weight in oncology care: results of an American Society of Clinical Oncology national patient survey. Cancer. 2022;128(14):2817‐2825. doi:10.1002/cncr.34231
Schmitz KH, Campbell AM, Stuiver MM, et al. Exercise is medicine in oncology: engaging clinicians to help patients move through cancer. CA Cancer J Clin. 2019;69(6):468‐484. doi:10.3322/caac.21579
National Accreditation Program for Breast Centers. Optimal Resources for Breast Care (2024 Standards). American College of Surgeons; 2023.
Commission on Cancer. Cancer Program Standards 2012: Ensuring Patient‐Centered Care. Version 2. American College of Surgeons; 2012.
Zahnd WE, James AS, Jenkins WD, et al. Rural‐urban differences in cancer incidence and trends in the United States. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2018;27(11):1265‐1274. doi:10.1158/1055‐9965.epi‐17‐0430
Eberth JM, Zahnd WE, Adams SA, Friedman DB, Wheeler SB, Hébert JR. Mortality‐to‐incidence ratios by US congressional district: implications for epidemiologic, dissemination and implementation research, and public health policy. Prev Med. 2019;129S:105849. doi:10.1016/j.ypmed.2019.105849
Blake KD, Moss JL, Gaysynsky A, Srinivasan S, Croyle RT. Making the case for investment in rural cancer control: an analysis of rural cancer incidence, mortality, and funding trends. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2017;26(7):992‐997. doi:10.1158/1055‐9965.epi‐17‐0092
Bulls HW, Chang PH, Brownstein NC, et al. Patient‐reported symptom burden in routine oncology care: examining racial and ethnic disparities. Cancer Rep (Hoboken). 2022;5(3):e1478. doi:10.1002/cnr2.1478
Penedo FJ, Natori A, Fleszar‐Pavlovic SE, et al. Factors associated with unmet supportive care needs and emergency department visits and hospitalizations in ambulatory oncology. JAMA Netw Open. 2023;6:e2319352. doi:10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2023.19352
Obeng‐Gyasi S, Graham N, Kumar S, et al. Examining allostatic load, neighborhood socioeconomic status, symptom burden and mortality in multiple myeloma patients. Blood Cancer J. 2022;12(4):53. doi:10.1038/s41408‐022‐00648‐y
Lloyd‐Williams M, Shiels C, Dowrick C, Kissane D. Socio‐economic deprivation and symptom burden in UK hospice patients with advanced cancer—findings from a longitudinal study. Cancers (Basel). 2021;13(11):2537. doi:10.3390/cancers13112537
Anderson T, Herrera D, Mireku F, et al. Geographical variation in social determinants of female breast cancer mortality across US counties. JAMA Netw Open. 2023;6(9):e2333618. doi:10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2023.33618
Levesque JF, Harris MF, Russell G. Patient‐centred access to health care: conceptualising access at the interface of health systems and populations. Int J Equity Health. 2013;12(1):18. doi:10.1186/1475‐9276‐12‐18
Schmitz KH, Stout NL, Maitin‐Shepard M, et al. Moving Through Cancer: setting the agenda to make exercise standard in oncology practice. Cancer. 2021;127(3):476‐484. doi:10.1002/cncr.33245
United States Census Bureau, 2020 Census Results. United States Census Bureau; 2024.
United States Census Bureau. American Community Survey. United States Census Bureau; 2024.
Andrews MR, Tamura K, Claudel SE, et al. Geospatial analysis of neighborhood deprivation index (NDI) for the United States by county, J Maps. 2020;16(1):101‐112. doi:10.1080/17445647.2020.1750066
Powell‐Wiley TM, Ayers C, Agyemang P, et al. Neighborhood‐level socioeconomic deprivation predicts weight gain in a multi‐ethnic population: longitudinal data from the Dallas Heart Study. Prev Med. 2014;66:22‐27. doi:10.1016/j.ypmed.2014.05.011
Diez Roux AV, Mair C. Neighborhoods and health. Ann N Y Acad Sci. 2010;1186(1):125‐145. doi:10.1111/j.1749‐6632.2009.05333.x
US Department of Agriculture (USDA). Rural‐Urban Continuum Codes. USDA; 2013.
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). US Cancer Statistics. CDC; 2024.
Pebesma E, Bivand R. Spatial Data Science: With Applications in R. 1st ed. Chapman and Hall/CRC; 2023.
Getis A, Ord JK. The analysis of spatial association by use of distance statistics. Geogr Anal. 2010;24(3):189‐206. doi:10.1111/j.1538‐4632.1992.tb00261.x
Ligibel JA, Bohlke K, May AM, et al. Exercise, diet, and weight management during cancer treatment: ASCO guideline. J Clin Oncol. 2022;40(22):2491‐2507. doi:10.1200/jco.22.00687
Commission on Cancer. Optimal Resources for Cancer Care. 2020 Standards. American College of Surgeons; 2020.
May AM, Bosch MJ, Velthuis MJ, et al. Cost‐effectiveness analysis of an 18‐week exercise programme for patients with breast and colon cancer undergoing adjuvant chemotherapy: the randomised PACT study. BMJ Open. 2017;7(3):e012187. doi:10.1136/bmjopen‐2016‐012187
van de Wiel HJ, Stuiver MM, May AM, et al. Cost‐effectiveness of an internet‐based physical activity support program (with and without physiotherapy counselling) on physical activity levels of breast and prostate cancer survivors: design of the PABLO trial. BMC Cancer. 2018;18(1):1073. doi:10.1186/s12885‐018‐4927‐z
Wonders KY, Schmitz K, Wise R, Hale R. Cost‐savings analysis of an individualized exercise oncology program in early‐stage breast cancer survivors: a randomized clinical control trial. JCO Oncol Pract. 2022;18(7):e1170‐e1180. doi:10.1200/op.21.00690
van Waart H, van Dongen JM, van Harten WH, et al. Cost‐utility and cost‐effectiveness of physical exercise during adjuvant chemotherapy. Eur J Health Econ. 2018;19(6):893‐904. doi:10.1007/s10198‐017‐0936‐0
Kampshoff CS, van Dongen JM, van Mechelen W, et al. Long‐term effectiveness and cost‐effectiveness of high versus low‐to‐moderate intensity resistance and endurance exercise interventions among cancer survivors. J Cancer Surviv. 2018;12(3):417‐429. doi:10.1007/s11764‐018‐0681‐0
Retèl VP, van der Molen L, Hilgers FJM, et al. A cost‐effectiveness analysis of a preventive exercise program for patients with advanced head and neck cancer treated with concomitant chemo‐radiotherapy. BMC Cancer. 2011;11(1):475. doi:10.1186/1471‐2407‐11‐475
Gordon LG, Scuffham P, Battistutta D, Graves N, Tweeddale M, Newman B. A cost‐effectiveness analysis of two rehabilitation support services for women with breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2005;94(2):123‐133. doi:10.1007/s10549‐005‐5828‐9
Patel AV, Friedenreich CM, Moore SC, et al. American College of Sports Medicine roundtable report on physical activity, sedentary behavior, and cancer prevention and control. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2019;51(11):2391‐2402. doi:10.1249/mss.0000000000002117
Stout NL, Santa Mina D, Lyons KD, Robb K, Silver JK. A systematic review of rehabilitation and exercise recommendations in oncology guidelines. CA Cancer J Clin. 2021;71(2):149‐175. doi:10.3322/caac.21639
Kennedy MA, Potiaumpai M, Maitin‐Shepard M, et al. Looking back: a review of policy implications for exercise oncology. J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr. 2023;2023(61):140‐148. doi:10.1093/jncimonographs/lgad002
Ligibel JA, Jones LW, Brewster AM, et al. Oncologists' attitudes and practice of addressing diet, physical activity, and weight management with patients with cancer: findings of an ASCO survey of the oncology workforce. J Oncol Pract. 2019;15(6):e520‐e528. doi:10.1200/jop.19.00124
Chang P, Zheng J. Updates in cancer rehabilitation telehealth. Curr Phys Med Rehabil Rep. 2022;10(4):332‐338. doi:10.1007/s40141‐022‐00372‐5
Thorsen L, Gjerset GM, Loge JH, et al. Cancer patients' needs for rehabilitation services. Acta Oncol. 2011;50(2):212‐222. doi:10.3109/0284186x.2010.531050
Silver JK, Baima J, Mayer RS. Impairment‐driven cancer rehabilitation: an essential component of quality care and survivorship. CA Cancer J Clin. 2013;63(5):295‐317. doi:10.3322/caac.21186
Arias Lopez MDP, Ong BA, Borrat FX, et al. Digital literacy as a new determinant of health: a scoping review. PLOS Digit Health. 2023;2(10):e0000279. doi:10.1371/journal.pdig.0000279
Zhang Y, Xu P, Sun Q, Baral S, Xi L, Wang D. Factors influencing the e‐health literacy in cancer patients: a systematic review. J Cancer Surviv. 2023;17(2):425‐440. doi:10.1007/s11764‐022‐01260‐6