Carlos, Ruth

AbstractBackgroundTobacco use is associated with adverse outcomes among patients diagnosed with cancer. Socioeconomic determinants influence access and utilization of tobacco treatment; little is known about the relationship between neighborhood socioeconomic disadvantage (NSD) and tobacco assessment, assistance, and cessation among patients diagnosed with cancer.MethodsA modified Cancer Patient Tobacco Use Questionnaire (C‐TUQ) was administered to patients enrolled in nine ECOG‐ACRIN clinical trials. We examined associations of NSD with (1) smoking status, (2) receiving tobacco cessation assessment and support, and (3) cessation behaviors. NSD was classified by tertiles of the Area Deprivation Index. Associations between NSD and tobacco variables were evaluated using logistic regression.ResultsA total of 740 patients completing the C‐TUQ were 70% male, 94% White, 3% Hispanic, mean age 58.8 years. Cancer diagnoses included leukemia 263 (36%), lymphoma 141 (19%), prostate 131 (18%), breast 79 (11%), melanoma 69 (9%), myeloma 53 (7%), and head and neck 4 (0.5%). A total of 402 (54%) never smoked, 257 (35%) had formerly smoked, and 81 (11%) were currently smoking. Patients in high disadvantaged neighborhoods were approximately four times more likely to report current smoking (odds ratio [OR], 3.57; 95% CI, 1.69–7.54; p = .0009), and more likely to report being asked about smoking (OR, 4.24; 95% CI, 1.64–10.98; p = .0029), but less likely to report receiving counseling (OR, 0.11; 95% CI, 0.02–0.58; p = .0086) versus those in the least disadvantaged neighborhoods.ConclusionsGreater neighborhood socioeconomic disadvantage was associated with smoking but less cessation support. Increased cessation support in cancer care is needed, particularly for patients from disadvantaged neighborhoods.

Background Sexual and gender minority individuals face numerous cancer‐related inequities, many of which appear to be underreported. However, to the best of the authors’ knowledge, no one has assessed rates of acquisition of sexual orientation and gender identity (SOGI) data within community oncology settings. Methods Community oncology practices that were part of the NCI Community Oncology Research Program (NCORP) network were asked whether they routinely collected SOGI information and coded this information in their electronic medical records. The proportion of practice groups reporting routine collection of sexual and/or gender minority information was calculated. Potential associations between the collection of SOGI information and practice group–level and state‐level characteristics (from Gallup poll data) were also provided. Results Twenty‐four percent of the responding NCORP practice groups reported routine collection of sexual orientation information, and 10% reported collection of gender identity information. Practices located in western regions of the United States, practices in states with higher proportions of sexual and gender minority–identifying individuals, and practices with lower proportions of non‐Hispanic patients were more likely to ask patients about sexual orientation and/or gender identity. Conclusions US oncology practices that participate in research do not frequently collect SOGI information from patients with cancer. Educational initiatives should inform oncology staff and providers about the importance of collecting gender identity and sexual orientation information to improve existent disparities faced by sexual and gender minority patients.