Skip to main content
eScholarship
Open Access Publications from the University of California

Scholarly Works (35 results)

  • Article
  • Peer Reviewed
UC Davis Previously Published Works (2017)
Escalating costs and concerns about quality of cancer care have increased calls for quality measurement and performance accountability for providers and health plans. The purpose of the present cross-sectional study was to assess variability in the quality of cancer care by health insurance type in California.Persons with breast, ovary, endometrium, cervix, colon, lung, or gastric cancer during the period 2004 to 2014 were identified in the California Cancer Registry. Individuals were stratified into 5 health insurance categories: private insurance, Medicare, Medicaid, dual Medicare and Medicaid eligible, and uninsured. Quality of care was evaluated using Commission on Cancer quality measures. Logistic regression models were generated to assess the independent effect of health insurance type on stage at diagnosis, quality of care and survival after adjusting for age, sex, race/ethnicity, and socioeconomic status (SES).A total of 763,884 cancer cases were evaluated. Individuals with Medicaid or Medicare-Medicaid dual-eligible coverage and the uninsured had significantly lower odds of receiving recommended radiation and/or chemotherapy after diagnosis or surgery for breast, endometrial, and colon cancer, relative to those with private insurance. Dual eligible patients with gastric cancer had 21% lower odds of having the recommended number of lymph nodes removed and examined compared to privately insured patients.After adjusting for known demographic confounders, substantial and consistent disparities in quality of cancer care exist according to type of health insurance in California. Further study is needed to identify particular factors and mechanisms underlying the identified treatment disparities across sources of health insurance.
    Creative Commons 'BY-NC-ND' version 4.0 license
    • Article
    • Peer Reviewed
    UC Davis Previously Published Works (2017)

    Escalating costs and concerns about quality of cancer care have increased calls for quality measurement and performance accountability for providers and health plans. The purpose of the present cross-sectional study was to assess variability in the quality of cancer care by health insurance type in California.Persons with breast, ovary, endometrium, cervix, colon, lung, or gastric cancer during the period 2004 to 2014 were identified in the California Cancer Registry. Individuals were stratified into 5 health insurance categories: private insurance, Medicare, Medicaid, dual Medicare and Medicaid eligible, and uninsured. Quality of care was evaluated using Commission on Cancer quality measures. Logistic regression models were generated to assess the independent effect of health insurance type on stage at diagnosis, quality of care and survival after adjusting for age, sex, race/ethnicity, and socioeconomic status (SES).A total of 763,884 cancer cases were evaluated. Individuals with Medicaid or Medicare-Medicaid dual-eligible coverage and the uninsured had significantly lower odds of receiving recommended radiation and/or chemotherapy after diagnosis or surgery for breast, endometrial, and colon cancer, relative to those with private insurance. Dual eligible patients with gastric cancer had 21% lower odds of having the recommended number of lymph nodes removed and examined compared to privately insured patients.After adjusting for known demographic confounders, substantial and consistent disparities in quality of cancer care exist according to type of health insurance in California. Further study is needed to identify particular factors and mechanisms underlying the identified treatment disparities across sources of health insurance.

      • Article
      • Peer Reviewed
      UC Davis Previously Published Works (2017)

      Escalating costs and concerns about quality of cancer care have increased calls for quality measurement and performance accountability for providers and health plans. The purpose of the present cross-sectional study was to assess variability in the quality of cancer care by health insurance type in California.Persons with breast, ovary, endometrium, cervix, colon, lung, or gastric cancer during the period 2004 to 2014 were identified in the California Cancer Registry. Individuals were stratified into 5 health insurance categories: private insurance, Medicare, Medicaid, dual Medicare and Medicaid eligible, and uninsured. Quality of care was evaluated using Commission on Cancer quality measures. Logistic regression models were generated to assess the independent effect of health insurance type on stage at diagnosis, quality of care and survival after adjusting for age, sex, race/ethnicity, and socioeconomic status (SES).A total of 763,884 cancer cases were evaluated. Individuals with Medicaid or Medicare-Medicaid dual-eligible coverage and the uninsured had significantly lower odds of receiving recommended radiation and/or chemotherapy after diagnosis or surgery for breast, endometrial, and colon cancer, relative to those with private insurance. Dual eligible patients with gastric cancer had 21% lower odds of having the recommended number of lymph nodes removed and examined compared to privately insured patients.After adjusting for known demographic confounders, substantial and consistent disparities in quality of cancer care exist according to type of health insurance in California. Further study is needed to identify particular factors and mechanisms underlying the identified treatment disparities across sources of health insurance.

        • Article
        • Peer Reviewed
        California Breast Cancer Research Program Funded Publications (2000)
          Cover page: Increasing trends in the use of breast-conserving surgery in California
          • Article
          • Peer Reviewed
          UC Davis Previously Published Works (2016)
            Cover page: Colorectal Cancer Trends in California and the need of Greater Screening of Hispanic Men
            • Article
            UC Davis Previously Published Works (2015)
              Cover page: Disparities in Stage at Diagnosis, Survival, and Quality of Cancer Care in California by Source of Health Insurance
              • Article
              • Peer Reviewed
              UC Davis Previously Published Works (2016)

              Introduction

              Colorectal cancer (CRC) incidence and mortality rates have decreased dramatically since 1990, both nationally and in California, except among Hispanic men. This study examined trends in CRC incidence, mortality, and survival to determine likely contributing factors for the differential trends between Hispanic and non-Hispanic white men in California.

              Methods

              California Cancer Registry data were used to identify 23,157 Hispanic and 114,944 white men diagnosed with CRC between 1990 and 2012. Joinpoint trends in incidence, mortality, and 5-year relative survival were examined by age, stage at diagnosis, and tumor location. Data used in the study were extracted from the California Cancer Registry database and analyzed in 2015.

              Results

              Both incidence and mortality rates decreased substantially among white men between 1990 and 2012, but no corresponding decrease was observed among Hispanic men. Both groups experienced similar trends in survival and stage at diagnosis over time. White men had greater declines in CRC incidence and mortality in all age groups, particularly those aged >50 years. Hispanic men had a significantly higher proportion (65%) of tumors in the distal colon than white men (59%).

              Conclusions

              CRC incidence and mortality rates have decreased among white men since 1990, but not among Hispanic men. Results from this study suggest lower screening rates may be an important reason why CRC rates in California did not decline in Hispanic men. Effective strategies aimed at both Hispanics and their healthcare providers are needed to increase CRC screening among Hispanic men and reduce their CRC burden.
                Cover page: Colorectal Cancer Trends in California and the Need for Greater Screening of Hispanic Men
                • Article
                • Peer Reviewed
                UC Davis Previously Published Works (2010)
                Very few studies have simultaneously examined incidence of the leading cancers in relation to socioeconomic status (SES) and race/ethnicity in populations including Hispanics and Asians. This study aims to describe SES disparity in cancer incidence within each of four major racial/ethnic groups (non-Hispanic white, black, Hispanic, and Asian/Pacific Islander) for five major cancer sites, including female breast cancer, colorectal cancer, cervical cancer, lung cancer, and prostate cancer. Invasive cancers of the five major sites diagnosed from 1998 to 2002 (n = 376,158) in California were included in the study. Composite area-based SES measures were used to quantify SES level and to calculate cancer incidence rates stratified by SES. Relative index of inequality (RII) was generated to measure SES gradient of cancer incidence within each racial/ethnic group. Significant variations were detected in SES disparities across the racial/ethnic groups for all five major cancer sites. Female breast cancer and prostate cancer incidence increased with increased SES in all groups, with the trend strongest among Hispanics. Incidence of cervical cancer increased with decreased SES, with the largest gradient among non-Hispanic white women. Lung cancer incidence increased with decreased SES with the exception of Hispanic men and women, for whom SES gradient was in the opposite direction. For colorectal cancer, higher incidence was associated with lower SES in non-Hispanic whites but with higher SES in Hispanics and Asian/Pacific Islander women. Examining SES disparity stratified by race/ethnicity enhances our understanding of the complex relationships between cancer incidence, SES, and race/ethnicity.
                  Cover page: Does socioeconomic disparity in cancer incidence vary across racial/ethnic groups?
                  • Article
                  • Peer Reviewed
                  UC Davis Previously Published Works (2013)
                  Comorbidity burden has been suggested as influencing early-stage breast cancer therapy but previous studies have not considered the severity of these comorbidities. Therefore, we examined the influence of comorbidity severity by age and race/ethnicity on early-stage breast cancer treatment over time. We used linked Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER)-Medicare data to determine whether comorbidity severity influences receipt of definitive and preferred early-stage breast cancer treatment and explains racial/ethnic and age disparities in receiving such therapy. Definitive surgical therapy was defined as any primary surgery other than breast conserving surgery (BCS) without radiation therapy (RT). Preferred surgical therapy was defined as BCS plus RT. Comorbidities were defined as either "unstable" (life threatening or difficult to control) or "stable" (less serious but with potential to influence daily activity). Surgical treatment trends from 1993 to 2005 were analyzed in regression models adjusting for comorbidity burden, age, and race/ethnicity in 93,596 elderly female Medicare beneficiaries with stage 1-2 invasive breast cancer. Receipt of BCS alone (compared with any definitive surgical therapy) was independently associated with neighborhood socioeconomic status, unmarried status (OR [odds ratio] 1.18, 95% CI: 1.12-1.23), tumor size (OR 0.78, 95% CI: 0.69-0.87 for tumors ≥4 cm vs. <2 cm), tumor grade (OR = 0.89, 0.88, and 0.81 for grades 2-4 vs. 1, respectively), stable comorbidities (OR = 0.76, 0.71, and 0.72 for 1, 2, and 3 vs. 0 stable comorbidities, respectively), and unstable comorbidities (OR 1.20, 95% CI: 1.14-1.28). Black women were 4-5% more likely to receive suboptimal therapy (BCS alone), even after adjusting for all available patient, tumor, and regional characteristics. Black race/ethnicity was associated with higher probability of receiving suboptimal treatment, independent of comorbidities, although we do not know whether this effect was due to clinicians' failure to offer RT or patients' failure to accept it.
                    Cover page: Severity of comorbid conditions and early‐stage breast cancer therapy: linked SEER‐medicare data from 1993 to 2005
                    • Article
                    • Peer Reviewed
                    UC Davis Previously Published Works (2017)

                    The presence of comorbid medical conditions can significantly affect a cancer patient's treatment options, quality of life, and survival. However, these important data are often lacking from population-based cancer registries. Leveraging routine linkage to hospital discharge data, a comorbidity score was calculated for patients in the California Cancer Registry (CCR) database.

                    California cancer cases diagnosed between 1991 and 2013 were linked to statewide hospital discharge data. A Deyo and Romano adapted Charlson Comorbidity Index was calculated for each case, and the association of comorbidity score with overall survival was assessed with Kaplan-Meier curves and Cox proportional hazards models. Using a subset of Medicare-enrolled CCR cases, the index was validated against a comorbidity score derived using Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER)-Medicare linked data.

                    A comorbidity score was calculated for 71% of CCR cases. The majority (60.2%) had no relevant comorbidities. Increasing comorbidity score was associated with poorer overall survival. In a multivariable model, high comorbidity conferred twice the risk of death compared to no comorbidity (hazard ratio 2.33, 95% CI: 2.32-2.34). In the subset of patients with a SEER-Medicare-derived score, the sensitivity of the hospital discharge-based index for detecting any comorbidity was 76.5. The association between overall mortality and comorbidity score was stronger for the hospital discharge-based score than for the SEER-Medicare-derived index, and the predictive ability of the hospital discharge-based score, as measured by Harrell's C index, was also slightly better for the hospital discharge-based score (C index 0.62 versus 0.59, P<0.001).

                    Despite some limitations, using hospital discharge data to construct a comorbidity index for cancer registries is a feasible and valid method to enhance registry data, which can provide important clinically relevant information for population-based cancer outcomes research.

                      Top