Currently Viewing:
SGO Annual Meeting on Women's Cancer
Dr Martha Gaines Discusses the Importance of the Patient Voice
March 25, 2018
Currently Reading
Clinical Trials Can Reduce Disparities in Advanced Ovarian Cancer, but Funding Is Needed, Researchers Say
March 25, 2018
Deciding When to Use PARP Inhibitors, and Which One
March 25, 2018
Boys Don't Get HPV Vaccination Because Doctors Don't Recommend It, Study Finds
March 25, 2018
Dr Victoria Bae-Jump on Obesity and Endometrial Cancer
March 25, 2018
Dr Anna Beavis Discusses Gender Differences in HPV Vaccination
March 25, 2018
Putting PARP Inhibitor Perspectives Into Practice in "Beyond the Guidelines" Session
March 26, 2018
Dr Oliver Dorigo on New, Innovative Therapies in Gynecologic Cancers
March 26, 2018
Dr William Cliby Explains Predictors of Patient Outcomes in Ovarian Cancer
March 26, 2018
Study Explores Mechanism Linking Statin to Reduced Tumor Size in Endometrial Cancer
March 26, 2018
Study Models ASCO Alternative Payment Model in Advanced Ovarian Cancer Care
March 27, 2018
Dr Sean C. Dowdy: Reducing Opioid Abuse in Patients Undergoing Surgery for Gynecologic Malignancies
April 04, 2018
Dr Victoria Bae-Jump Discusses Standard of Care, Novel Therapies For Endometrial Cancer
April 11, 2018
Dr Oliver Dorigo: Novel Therapies Being Researched by Stanford for Gynecologic Malignancies
April 13, 2018
Dr Anna Beavis Highlights Importance of Addressing Gender Gaps in HPV Vaccination
April 15, 2018
Dr William Cliby: Patient Factors and Surgery, Quality of Care For Ovarian Cancer
April 16, 2018
Dr Sean C. Dowdy Discusses Improving Surgical Outcomes in Gynecologic Oncology
April 18, 2018
Dr Martha Gaines: Turning Experience as Cancer Survivor into Patient Advocacy
April 20, 2018
Dr Oliver Dorigo on Identified Biomarkers in Gynecologic Malignancies
April 25, 2018
Dr Victoria Bae-Jump on Challenges in Treating Patients With Endometrial Cancer
April 27, 2018
Dr William Cliby Discusses Improving Surgical Outcomes in Ovarian Cancer
April 30, 2018
Dr Sean C. Dowdy on Delays Between Discovering Improved Treatment, Practice and the Application of It
May 05, 2018
Dr Martha Gaines on Helping Patients Understand Their Disease, Identifying Available Resources
May 11, 2018
Dr Oliver Dorigo Discusses an Interdisciplinary Approach to Care in Gynecologic Oncology
May 14, 2018

Clinical Trials Can Reduce Disparities in Advanced Ovarian Cancer, but Funding Is Needed, Researchers Say

Mary Caffrey
Clinical trials, and offering patients support to take part in them, can extend lives of patients with ovarian cancer, according to a researcher from the Medical College of Georgia. But another analysis finds that gynecologial cancers are low on the government's funding priority list.
Survival rates in ovarian cancer may differ between racial groups, or among patients who must travel different distances to an oncologist. Taking part in a clinical trial can erase those disparities, according to research presented Saturday at the Society of Gynecologic Oncology’s 2018 Annual Meeting on Women’s Cancer, taking place in New Orleans, Louisiana.

The study was among a group of abstracts presented in the opening scientific plenary session, which featured data on the effect of the Affordable Care Act (ACA) on access to gynecological care, as well as the crisis of a rapid drop in research dollars to study gynecology cancers, despite their deadly toll.

Khilen Patel, MD, of the Medical College of Georgia (MCG), lead author of the retrospective study, presented results from 236 patients who had been treated at the Georgia Cancer Center at Augusta University between 2004 and 2017 for epithelial ovarian, fallopian tube, and peritoneal cancer, at stage III or stage IV. White patients were more likely to live closer to the treatment center and have their cancer caught early. In addition, when 2 otherwise similar patients did not take part in a trial, the white patient lived longer. But being in trial could all but close that gap, Patel said.

Patel said the study demonstrates much more than the need to enroll more minorities in clinical trials—it shows that a project called The Lydia House, which was started by the cancer center’s own gynecologists, has saved lives by putting clinical trials within reach. During his presentation, Patel showed a photo of the building, which allows each patient being treated to stay with a family member for free and have access to a kitchen to prepare meals.

“Our family members love it,” he said in an interview with The American Journal of Managed Care®. Giving patients a place to stay not only alleviates financial pressure, but has also created a culture that supports and empowers patients. “They often feel they are a burden to their family, and this relieves that burden,” Patel said.

Study Data

Of the 236 patients in the MCG study, 145 had taken part in a clinical trial, while 91 had not. Researchers compared patients’ overall survival (OS) by race and by distance to institution. They found that white patients were more likely to be diagnosed at stage III (82.6% vs 74.1%), and they were more likely to live near MCG; 60.7% of whites lived less than 25 miles from the treatment center compared with 50% of minority patients. Minority patients were more likely to live more than 50 miles away (19.1% for white patients vs 29.3% for minority patients).

When researchers controlled for age and distance from the institution among patients who did not take part in a trial, they found a “near significant trend,” in which being white made a difference in OS (hazard ratio [HR]= 0.398, 95% CI 0.216-0.732, P = 0.0591). White patients’ OS was an average of 71.4 months, while minority patients’ OS was 24.5 months. But the gap closed among patients taking part in trials, (HR = 0.841, 95% CI 0.505–1.401, P = 0.6269). For those in trials, white patients’ average OS was 53.5 months, while minorities’ average OS was 50.9.

Patel said that in contrast with the 6% national average participation rate for minorities, the minority participation rate in clinical trials at Georgia Cancer Center is 25%.

Clinical Trial Crisis

Patel’s hopeful tone was offset by the dire data from Ryan Spencer, MD, of the University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, who described a “crisis” in clinical trials for gynecological cancers—a 90% reduction in enrollment and a 68% reduction in available trials, which can both be traced to being low on the priority list at the National Cancer Institute (NCI). At the same time, mortality for uterine cancer is increasing, Spencer said, and “Things may be worse for certain of our patients.”

Spencer led a group that developed a scoring mechanism to show how NCI’s funding for gynecological cancers makes no sense, given how lethal these cancers are. The group studied funding across 13 cancers over an 8-year period ending in 2014. Using NCI’s Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results (SEER), Cancer Trends Progress Report and Funding Statistics, the researchers developed a score of funding per years of life lost from 100 cases of uterine, ovarian, and cervical cancer, and compared the results with 10 common cancers or those that uniquely affect men.

“Of the 13 cancers studied, uterine cancer ranks next to last in annual NCI funding,” they wrote, and all 3 gynecological cancers were among the lowest in NCI funding. From 2007 to 2014, the final year brought decreases in funding, “from peak levels of 18.5% for ovarian cancer and 18.8% for uterine cancer compared to only a 9.9% decrease for breast, 7.1% for testicular, 6.3% for leukemias, and 5.7% for kidney/renal pelvis, and a 67% increase for pancreatic cancer.” Funding to lethality scores, with ranks in parentheses, include:
  • Prostate, 1.81 (first)
  • Breast, 1.80 (second)
  • Ovarian 0.097 (ninth)
  • Cervix 0.087 (10th)
  • Uterine 0.057 (12th)


Lack of funding translates into fewer advances, Spencer said. Gynecological cancers risk lagging others in basic research that focuses on genetics and molecular targets, as well as prevention, survival, and targeted therapies that advance to clinical trials.

Effects of the Affordable Care Act

Friday marked 8 years since passage of the ACA, and 2 abstracts took stock of how it has affected insurance availability, especially for the poorest patients. Edward J. Pavlik, PhD, presented research from the University of Kentucky that examined premium pricing for Qualified Health Plans in various markets in Kentucky—a state considered a poster child for expansion of coverage—over time. While the results found significant increases in premium over time, especially for the bronze plans in rural markets (70%) between 2014 and 2017, the study also found large drops in the uninsured rate. Despite this, Qualified Health Plan enrollment is up 42.6%.

A presentation by Haley Moss, MD, MBA, of Duke University, used SEER data from 2011 to 2014 to show how the implementation of the ACA has reduced racial and socioeconomic disparities among women diagnosed with a gynecologic malignancy. Not having insurance, she said, means a patient is less like to have treatment based on clinical guidelines and more likely to experience financial toxicity, reducing mortality. However, the decision of some state to not expand Medicaid amounts to missed opportunities for many blacks, who live disproportionately in states that did not expand Medicaid.

According to the abstract, among cervical cancer patients, “there was a reduction in uninsured rates among those living in high poverty ZIP codes in [expansion states]. There was significant reduction in uninsured rates among black patients with ovarian cancer (9.2% to 0.5%).” Significant differences in lack of insurance among uterine cancer patients were not seen.

 
Copyright AJMC 2006-2019 Clinical Care Targeted Communications Group, LLC. All Rights Reserved.
x
Welcome the the new and improved AJMC.com, the premier managed market network. Tell us about yourself so that we can serve you better.
Sign Up