Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35559905›Full record

ReviewJournal of cancer policy2021

Cancer genetic testing in marginalized groups during an era of evolving healthcare reform.

Stephen M Modell, Caitlin G Allen, Amy Ponte, Gail Marcus

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of cancer policy, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

17 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. A cost-utility analysis ofFrontiers in public health · 2023
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Timing ofCancer control : journal of the Moffitt Cancer Center
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Stephen M ModellEpidemiology, University of Michigan School of Public Health, M5409 SPH II, 1415 Washington Hts., Ann Arbor, MI, 48109, United States. Electronic address: mod@umich.edu.
Caitlin G AllenBehavioral, Social and Health Education Sciences, Rollins School of Public Health, Emory University, 1518 Clifton Rd., Atlanta, GA, 30322, United States.
Amy PonteGenedu Health Solutions, 47 Petigru Dr., Beaufort, SC, 29902, United States.
Gail MarcusGenetics and Newborn Screening Unit, North Carolina Department of Health and Human Services, C/O CDSA of the Cape Fear, 3311 Burnt Mill Dr., Wilmington, NC, 28403, United States.

Funding

Improving Family Cancer History Collection using Social Network, Human Centered Design, and Implementation Science ApproachesK00CA253576 · NCI · MEDICAL UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH CAROLINA · PI ALLEN, CAITLIN GLOECKNER · 2020 to 2024
$443k
Engineering tumor-targeting bacteria to sense and deliver therapeuticsF99CA253756 · NCI · COLUMBIA UNIV NEW YORK MORNINGSIDE · PI HARIMOTO, TETSUHIRO · 2020 to 2021
$92k
NCI NIH HHS F99 CA253576NCI NIH HHS F99 CA253756NCI NIH HHS K00 CA253576
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe Affordable Care Act and subsequent reforms pose tradeoffs for racial-ethnic, rural, and sex-related groups in the United States experiencing disparities in BRCA1/2 genetic counseling and testing and colorectal cancer screening, calling for policy changes.

methodsA working group of the American Public Health Association Genomics Forum Policy Committee engaged in monthly meetings to examine ongoing literature and identify policy alternatives in the coverage of cancer genetic services for marginalized groups. 589 items were collected; 408 examined. Efforts continued from February 2015 through September 2020.

resultsAfrican Americans and Latinos have shown 7-8 % drops in uninsured rates since the Exchanges opened. The ACA has increased BRCA1/2 test availability while several disparities remain, including by sex. Rural testing and screening utilization rates have improved. Medicaid expansion and the inclusion of Medicare in the ACA have resulted in mixed improvements in colorectal cancer screening rates in marginalized groups.

conclusionCancer genetic testing and screening to date have only partially benefited from healthcare reforms. Sensitivity to cost concerns and further monitoring of emerging data are needed. A reduction in disparities depends on the availability of private insurance, Medicaid and Medicare to the marginalized. Attention to value-based design and the way cancer benefits are translated into actual testing and screening are crucial. POLICY SUMMARY: The findings suggest the need for further benefits-related health agency interpretation of and amendments to the ACA, continued Medicaid and innovative Medicare expansion, and incorporation of cancer services values-based considerations at several levels, aimed at reducing group disparities.

Indexed as

Colorectal NeoplasmsPatient Protection and Affordable Care ActAgedGenetic TestingHealthcare DisparitiesHealth Care ReformHumansInsurance CoverageMedicareUnited StatesAfrican AmericansBreast cancerColorectal cancerEarly detection of cancerGenetic testingHealth care reformHispanic AmericansRural populationSex

Identifiers

PMID35559905
PMCPMC8224823

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.