ArticleBMC cancer2025
Assessing equity of care across metastatic breast cancer treatment junctures: a multi-site retrospective cohort study.
Article in BMC cancer, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundAlthough inequality in the prevalence and mortality of metastatic breast cancer (mBC) have been documented, the contribution of non-clinical predictors along the care continuum remains unclear. This study aimed to identify determinants of disparities along the continuum of care among patients with mBC.
methodsA retrospective cohort study of patients with mBC under the Medicare Oncology Care Model program was conducted with Texas Oncology Network data from July 2016 to June 2021 as well as the County Health Rankings and Roadmaps Data. Study outcomes were rates of completion and time to receipt of services across four key care junctures: (1) Diagnosis and Evaluation, (2) Treatment Plan Design, (3) Treatment Implementation, and (4) End-of-life Care. Race/ethnicity was the primary predictor variable and secondary predictors included sociodemographic and clinical characteristics (referred to as the Vulnerability Cluster). Bivariate analysis, multivariable logistic regression, and generalized linear models were employed.
resultsAmong 460 patients included, mean age was 72.7 years and 98.7% were female; 73.7% were white, followed by 10.7% Hispanic, and 7.6% Black. Over 90% received services across the first three junctures. At End-of-life Care, only 14 (3.04%) received palliative care referral and 34.1% were enrolled in hospice, with an average length of stay (LOS) of 32.0 days. Adjusted analyses revealed significant racial/ethnic disparities in the End-of-life Care juncture, especially in hospice utilization. Compared to whites, blacks and Hispanics had shorter days to hospice enrollment, by 13.2% (Incidence Rate Ratio [IRR] = 0.868, 95% CI = 0.845-0.891, p < 0.001) and 34.8% (IRR = 0.652, 95% CI = 0.635-0.671, p < 0.001), respectively, and shorter LOS by 24.6 (IRR = 0.754, 95% CI = 0.645-0.882, p = 0.0004) and 25.3% (IRR = 0.747, 95% CI = 0.632-0.882, p = 0.0006), respectively. Other vulnerability cluster variables were predictive across care junctures.
conclusionsThe vulnerability cluster of variables, even in a Medicare population, were associated with the receipt and timeliness of care, especially at end-of-life among patients with mBC. More proactive and equitable care in mBC toward the end of their care journey is warranted.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.