Stand Up To Cancer
Arrow Left

RACIAL DISPARITIES IN CANCER: STATISTICS AND SOLUTIONS

DR. CHRISTOPHER M. MASI AND DR. OLUFUNMILAYO I. OLOPADE

Cancer mortality rates have declined significantly in the U.S. since the early 1990s: over 18% among men and over 10% among women. Breast cancer is no exception, as the death rate among women decreased from 33.1 per 100,000 in 1990 to 24.0 per 100,000 in 2005. At the same time, five-year survival increased from 84.8% in 1990 to 90.5% in 2000.

But hidden within these statistics is a disturbing trend: the black-white mortality gap is growing. Prior to 1980, breast cancer was both more common and more lethal among white women compared to black women. After 1980, breast cancer incidence remained higher among white women, but mortality in this group began to decline. Among black women, the mortality rate did not begin to decline until approximately 1990. While the death rate is now decreasing in both groups, it has fallen faster among white women, resulting in a widening racial gap. A racial difference of 5.0 deaths per 100,000 in 1990 became a difference of 9.5 deaths per 100,000 in 2005.

Such differences are not confined to breast cancer, as mortality rates are higher among blacks for cancers of the lung and bronchus, colon and rectum, liver and bile duct, stomach, prostate, and uterine cervix. In 2005, overall cancer mortality was 37% higher among black males compared to white males and 17% higher among black females compared to white females.

Similar gaps exist for non-cancer deaths as well, including those from heart disease, stroke, diabetes, pneumonia, kidney disease, and sepsis. Considering deaths from all causes, blacks have a 30% higher age-adjusted mortality rate than whites.

In 2000, the Institute of Medicine convened a special panel to examine the underlying causes of racial disparities in health. The resulting book, Unequal Treatment (2003), concluded that health and mortality disparities result from many factors, including lower quality of care provided to racial minorities. Other factors include lack of familiarity with racially diverse patients at hospitals and clinics, institutional discrimination based upon health insurance status, conscious and unconscious bias among physicians, lack of cultural competence among health care providers, and mistrust of the health care system as well as language barriers among patients.

Using Unequal Treatment as a starting point, oncologists and epidemiologists have further explored racial differences in breast cancer mortality. This research indicates that quality of care differences indeed contribute to mortality disparities. However, other factors play equal, if not greater roles. Among these are reduced access to screening mammography and clinical breast exams, delayed testing following abnormal screening results, more aggressive tumor biology, more advanced disease at the time of diagnosis, delayed treatment initiation, inadequate communication regarding treatment options and side effects, lower rates of definitive therapy, premature discontinuation of therapy, reduced monitoring following treatment, and inadequate survivorship care.

Because of the diversity of these factors, no single intervention will eliminate the racial gap in breast cancer mortality. Nevertheless, a variety of programs have begun to make inroads. At the federal level, the National Breast and Cervical Cancer Early Detection Program (NBCCEDP) helps uninsured and underinsured women pay for breast and cervical cancer screening and diagnostic testing, while the Breast and Cervical Cancer Prevention and Treatment Act of 2000 (BCCPTA) helps uninsured breast cancer patients obtain treatment by providing Medicaid benefits regardless of income or assets. Unfortunately, because of the low reimbursement rates, most private hospitals will not provide equal access to Medicaid patients.

At the local level, clinics and hospitals have taken a variety of approaches to reducing racial disparities in breast cancer mortality. The majority of these are designed to enhance screening mammography, while others focus on diagnostic testing, and a few address treatment initiation or quality of care. Among screening programs, those which are culturally tailored or address financial or logistical barriers are generally more effective than those which simply remind women they are due for mammography. This is especially true among women with fewer financial resources and those who have never had a mammogram. Among programs designed to facilitate diagnostic testing, case management is more effective than either patient- or physician-directed reminders.

1| 2| 3>>>
0 Comments
+ Login to Add Comments
Science
SU2C Mag
Photo courtesy Adrian Boliston
+ Print PDF    + Back to Articles

Dr. Christopher M. Masi is an assistant professor of medicine in the University of Chicago's Division of Biological Sciences; his principle area of research is health disparities by ethnicity and socioeconomic status. Dr. Olufunmilayo I. Olopade is a professor of medicine and Human Genetics Director at the University of Chicago's Cancer Risk Clinic. She is an expert on individualized treatment for breast cancer.

Invest in science, innovation, and the end of cancer.

+ Donate

Share this article:  
Email Email Email