Cited by 126Lung Cancer Diagnosis and TreatmentHealth disparities and outcomesGlobal Cancer Incidence and Screening

Racial disparities and treatment trends in a large cohort of elderly black and white patients with nonsmall cell lung cancer

Open access
Hardy, Dale, Liu, Chih‐Chin, Xia, Rui, Cormier, Janice N., Chan, Wenyaw, White, Arica, Burau, Keith, Du, Xianglin L.·2009·Cancer

Abstract

BACKGROUND: This study investigated whether there was a significant gap in receipt of treatment for nonsmall cell lung cancer (NSCLC) between blacks and whites, and whether the gap or disparity changed during the past 12 years from 1991 to 2002. METHODS: The study population consisted of 83,101 patients including 75,141 (90.4%) whites and 7960 (9.6%) blacks aged ≥65 years who were diagnosed with American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) stages I‐IV NSCLC identified from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) program's Medicare database. Age‐adjusted and sex‐adjusted rates and crude and adjusted odds ratios for receiving appropriate stage‐specific treatment of NSCLC were reported. RESULTS: For stages I‐II NSCLC combined, blacks were 37% less likely (OR, 0.63; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.55‐0.73) to receive surgery, 42% less likely (OR, 0.58; 95% CI, 0.36‐0.92) to receive chemotherapy, and for stages III‐IV combined, 57% less likely (OR, 0.43; 95% CI, 0.30‐0.61) to receive chemotherapy compared with whites. Older patients, women, and those in lower socioeconomic quartiles had greater disparities in receipt of treatment compared with the highest income quartile. Disparity trends were not significantly narrowed during the past 12 years between blacks and whites for receipt of the above treatments. CONCLUSIONS: There have been substantial disparities in receiving recommended treatments between blacks and whites, and these disparities have been relatively stable without a significant trend of narrowing during the past 12 years. Efforts should focus on providing appropriate quality treatment and educating blacks on the value of having these treatments to reduce these disparities in receipt of treatment for NSCLC. Cancer 2009. © 2009 American Cancer Society.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/cncr.24248

Cites

33 of 33 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Disparities in race, sex, socioeconomic status, level of education, residence, and insurance status, among other factors, continue to be associated with outcomes such as mortality, incidence, stage at diagnosis, and timely receipt of recommended treatment for patients with NSCLC.

    “The results show that disparities in race,128–131 sex,132 socioeconomic status,132–135 level of education,136 residence,128,136 and insurance status,137–139 among other factors, continue to be associated with outcomes such as mortality,128,140 incidence,137,140 stage at diagnosis, and timely receipt of recommended treatment129,131 for patients with NSCLC.”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Henschke CI, Naidich DP, Yankelevitz DF, et al. Early Lung Cancer Action Project: initial findings on repeat screenings. Cancer. 2001;92:153-159.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Hardy, D., Liu, C., Xia, R., Cormier, J. N., Chan, W., White, A., Burau, K., & Du, X. L.
Affiliations
The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center (US)
Corresponding author
Hardy, Dale
Venue
Cancer
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2009-04-28
Volume
115
Issue
10
Pages
2199-2211
ISSN
  • 0008-543X (ISSN-L)
  • 1097-0142
OpenAlex
W2084671951
Cited by
126
References
32
Citations by year
2025: 2 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 12 · 2018: 8 · 2017: 7 · 2016: 8 · 2015: 11 · 2014: 15 · 2013: 13 · 2012: 7
FWCI
5.59
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Cancer (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (RO1-HS016743)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine › Lung Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment
  • Social Sciences › Health › Health disparities and outcomes
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Global Cancer Incidence and Screening
Keywords
racial disparities, non-small cell lung cancer, elderly patients, black-white disparities, treatment receipt, chemotherapy, socioeconomic status, Medicare beneficiaries, SEER, treatment trends
MeSH terms
Aged, 80 and over, Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell Lung, Female, Humans, Lung Neoplasms, Male, Socioeconomic Factors, SEER Program, Black People, White People, Healthcare Disparities

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review