The impact of neighborhood socioeconomic deprivation on clinical outcomes for locally advanced and metastatic hepatocellular carcinoma: An incidence-based retrospective cohort study.

Authors

null

Shreya Shah

University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD

Shreya Shah , Apurva Raghu , Jennifer B Permuth , Dung-Tsa Chen , Margaret Park , Cheryl Knott , Benjamin Daniel Powers

Organizations

University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center and Research Institute, Tampa, FL, University of Maryland Marlene and Stewart Greenebaum Comprehensive Cancer Center, Baltimore, MD

Research Funding

H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center and Research Institute Miles for Moffitt Award

Background: Prior studies show that socioeconomic status impacts hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) outcomes. However, these have used larger geographic areas such as zip codes or counties for assessment. Using a statewide cancer registry the Area Deprivation Index (ADI), a granular measure of socioeconomic deprivation (SED), was used to assess receipt of treatment and overall survival (OS) for locally advanced and metastatic HCC. Methods: The incidence-based Florida Cancer Data System was used to identify stage III/IV HCC patients diagnosed from 2007-2015. The ADI was used to measure SED and is a validated dataset that ranks neighborhoods (census block groups) from 1-100 (higher scores = higher deprivation) based on income, education, housing, and other socioeconomic factors. Demographic, tumor, and treatment variables were assessed using descriptive statistics, regression plots, and survival analysis. Chemotherapeutic treatment (CT) included receipt of chemotherapy and/or chemoembolization. Results: The study identified 2,534 eligible patients. Males comprised 80.6% of the cohort. The median age was 63 years. By SED quartile, there were significant differences by age, race, insurance, and receipt of chemotherapy (p<0.05) but no difference by gender, ethnicity, stage, or survival. Overall, 39.1% received chemotherapeutic treatment. However, 41.0% of the lowest-deprivation patients received CT compared to 32.1% in the highest-deprivation cohort (p<0.01). After adjustment for potential confounders, the lowest deprivation quartile had increased odds of CT compared to the highest deprivation quartile (OR 1.47; 95% CI,1.15-1.87). The median OS for the cohort was 4.0 months and was 4.6 and 3.3 months, respectively, for the lowest and highest deprivation quartiles (p<0.01). For patients who received and did not receive CT, the median OS was 8.0 and 2.2 months, respectively (p<0.01). However, there was no difference in median OS by SED for those who received CT (p=0.14). Conclusions: In an incidence-based, statewide cancer registry, the median OS for locally advanced and metastatic HCC remains poor and most patients do not receive CT. While there were differences in receipt of CT by SED, when patients did receive CT, median OS was similar across SED quartiles. These data suggest that SED may impact receipt of treatment and efforts are needed to understand and address treatment disparities.

Lowest
Deprivation
Low DeprivationHigh DeprivationHighest
Deprivation
p-Value
N=624N=650N=589N=629
Chemotherapeutic treatment0.001
No347 (55.6%)345 (53.1%)339 (57.6%)411 (65.3%)
Yes256 (41.0%)283 (43.5%)235 (39.9%)202 (32.1%)
Unknown21 (3.4%)22 (3.4%)15 (2.5%)15 (2.6%)
Vital Status0.93
Alive41 (5.7%)44 (5.9%)43 (6.0%)44 (6.5%)
Dead682 (94.3%)695 (94.1%)673 (94.0%)632 (93.5%)

Disclaimer

This material on this page is ©2024 American Society of Clinical Oncology, all rights reserved. Licensing available upon request. For more information, please contact licensing@asco.org

Abstract Details

Meeting

2024 ASCO Quality Care Symposium

Session Type

Poster Session

Session Title

Poster Session B

Track

Health Care Access, Equity, and Disparities,Technology and Innovation in Quality of Care,Survivorship

Sub Track

Access to Treatment

Citation

JCO Oncol Pract 20, 2024 (suppl 10; abstr 108)

DOI

10.1200/OP.2024.20.10_suppl.108

Abstract #

108

Poster Bd #

C6

Abstract Disclosures