Mbah, Olive

Abstract Background The treatment (tx) landscape for chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) has evolved, with National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guideline-preferred novel therapies (NTs), such as acalabrutinib, zanubrutinib, and venetoclax-based regimens, now preferred over ibrutinib and chemoimmunotherapy (CIT) in front-line (1L) settings. We previously showed that patients (pts) from different racial/ethnic groups may not have equitable access to NTs. Here, we examined racial/ethnic inequities in 1L NT utilization among US pts with CLL and potential social determinants of health (SDOH) drivers of these inequities. Methods This retrospective cohort study utilized the US-based, electronic health record-derived de-identified Flatiron Health Research Database, linked to neighborhood (US Census track or block group) data from American Community Survey and Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality datasets. Eligible pts included adults with CLL who started 1L tx 01/01/2019-07/31/2024. The primary outcome was receipt of 1L therapy (CIT vs preferred NTs, ibrutinib vs preferred NTs), with NCCN guideline-preferred NTs (v2.2023-v3.2025) as a reference. Associations between race/ethnicity (White, Black, Hispanic) and 1L tx types were assessed using logistic regressions, adjusting for age, sex, year of 1L start, immunoglobulin heavy chain variable region status, and del17p/TP53 status. To better understand which SDOH factors contribute to racial and ethnic inequities in tx utilization, we performed mediation analysis using Multiple Mediation Analysis implemented through nonlinear multiple additive regression tree models. Individual-level (Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group status, practice type, insurance) and 20 area-level SDOH factors measuring social deprivation (defined as limited access to economic, social, neighborhood, physical, or healthcare resources) were assessed as potential mediators. Results Of the 4452 pts included in the study, 3717 were White (83%), 371 were Black (8%), 209 were Hispanic (5%), and 155 were Other race (4%). Black and Hispanic pts were more likely to live in neighborhoods with higher social deprivation, such as residential segregation (predominant race/ethnicity in the area: White, Black, Hispanic, Diverse), with no internet access, no vehicle ownership, and no health insurance coverage. Overall, 37% of pts received a preferred NT, highest among White (38%) pts, followed by Black (35%) and Hispanic (26%) pts. Compared with White pts, Hispanic pts were more likely to receive CIT than preferred NTs (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 2.12; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.46-3.09); Black (aOR 1.44; 95% CI 1.05-1.97) and Hispanic pts (aOR 1.83; 95% CI 1.17-2.85) were more likely to receive ibrutinib than preferred NTs. Pts living in areas with the highest social deprivation were less likely than their counterparts in lowest social deprivation neighborhoods to receive preferred NTs. Specifically, residence in predominantly Black or Hispanic neighborhoods (26% or 27% vs 39% predominantly White), areas with lowest socioeconomic status (32% vs 40%), and neighborhoods with the lowest levels of internet access (32% vs 39%), vehicle ownership (32% vs 39%), and health insurance coverage (34% vs 41%) was associated with lowest receipt of preferred NTs. In the mediation analysis, individual- and area-level SDOH factors explained 94.4% (95% CI 2.9-185.9) of the observed Black-White inequity in receipt of ibrutinib versus preferred NTs; residential segregation appeared to be the most important mediator (59.7%; 95% CI −3.5 to 123.0). Similarly, the Hispanic-White inequity in receipt of preferred NTs was driven by the combined effect of area-level SDOH and individual-level variables (88.5%; 95% CI 45.6-131.3), with residential segregation as the main driver (48.3%; 95% CI 10.7-85.9), followed by practice setting (9.8%; 95% CI −3.5 to 23.1). In contrast, measured SDOH factors did not explain the inequity in receipt of CIT versus preferred NTs between Hispanic and White pts (21.5%; 95% CI −8.3 to 51.4), suggesting that other factors may contribute to the observed inequities. Conclusion Black and Hispanic pts with CLL were less likely than White pts to receive preferred NTs. A significant proportion of these disparities was explained by area-level SDOH, particularly residential segregation. These findings underscore the need to address structural barriers to ensure equitable access to emerging, guideline-recommended treatments.

Abstract Background Racial disparities in patient-reported outcomes (PROs; e.g., symptoms, financial burden) among patients with cancer are well documented. Prior studies have attributed such disparities to patient- and provider-level factors, but less is known about the contribution of practice-level factors. Hospital racial composition of patients has been linked to disparities in care quality and outcomes, but questions remain regarding whether oncology practice racial composition mediates racial disparities. Using 2017-2020 data from the Patient-Reported Outcomes to Enhance Cancer Treatment (PRO-TECT) trial (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03249090), we examined racial disparities in PROs among patients with metastatic cancer, and whether oncology practice racial composition accounted for observed disparities. Methods Our sample included 1099 patients (n=198 Black; n=901 White) from 51 community oncology practices across the US. Predictors of interest were patient race (Black vs. White) and practice-reported racial composition (Black patient population >20% vs. ≤20%). Patient-reported outcome metrics included pain, appetite loss, fatigue, nausea, dyspnea, insomnia, constipation, diarrhea, and financial burden, measured at baseline and at 1- and 3-month follow-up using the EORTC Quality of Life Core Questionnaire (QLQ-C30). Raw EORTC QLQ-C30 scores were standardized to range from 0 (best) to 100 (worst). We estimated multilevel linear mixed models predicting each PRO as a function of patient race, adjusting for clinical and sociodemographic factors, followed by further adjustment for practice racial composition. Results Twelve out of fifty-one (23.5%) practices reported a Black racial composition of >20%, with 41.6% of Blacks and 14.5% Whites receiving care at these practices. Across all practices, Blacks reported worse pain (β=5.5, p=0.02), nausea (β=2.5, p=0.04) and financial burden (β=7.6, p<0.01), but less fatigue (β=-4.1, p=0.05) when compared with Whites. Regardless of race, patients receiving care at practices with a Black racial composition of >20% reported more pain (β=5.5, p=0.01), appetite loss (β=8.1, p<0.01), fatigue (β=5.1, p=0.01), nausea (β=2.3, p=0.05), dyspnea (β=4.3, p=0.04), and insomnia (β=4.8, p=0.03) than patients receiving care at practices comprised of ⇐20% Blacks. Practice racial composition did not mediate racial disparities in PROs. Conclusion Racial disparities in PROs were observed among patients treated at US community oncology practices. Practice racial composition was associated with multiple PROs, regardless of patient race, but racial disparities in PROs were not explained by practice racial composition. These findings suggest that identifying and addressing the needs of practices serving a disproportionate share of Black patents may be one effective strategy to mitigate practice-level disparities in cancer outcomes. Citation Format: Cleo A. Samuel, Olive Mbah, Wendi Elkins, Marjory Charlot, Amylou Dueck, Brenda F. Ginos, Jennifer Jansen, Deborah Schrag, Patty Spears, Angela Stover, Ethan Basch. Separate and unequal: Examining the role of race and site of care on patient-reported outcomes among patients with metastatic cancer (AFT-39) [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the AACR Virtual Conference: Thirteenth AACR Conference on the Science of Cancer Health Disparities in Racial/Ethnic Minorities and the Medically Underserved; 2020 Oct 2-4. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2020;29(12 Suppl):Abstract nr PO-119.