SynthesisJAMA network open2026
Equity and Cancer Survival Among Veterans Health Administration Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Synthesis in JAMA network open, 2026. 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
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Importance: In the US, Black patients with cancer consistently experience worse survival compared to White patients, even after adjusting for age, sex, and disease stage. Whether these disparities exist among patients receiving care in the Veterans Health Administration (VHA), an integrated health system designed to provide near-equal access to care, remains uncertain. Objective: To evaluate whether overall survival (OS) and cancer-specific survival (CSS) differ between Black veterans and those with other race receiving cancer care through VHA. Data Sources: PubMed was searched from January 2015 through April 2022. Reference lists from identified studies were also reviewed. Study Selection: Studies of US veterans receiving cancer care through the VHA were included if they reported OS or CSS by race and provided hazard ratios (HRs). Dual independent rating of titles and abstracts was conducted for inclusion. Data Extraction and Synthesis: A random-effects model was used to pool effect sizes, the Paule-Mandel estimator was used to calculate the heterogeneity variance τ2, and Knapp-Hartung adjustments were used to calculate the confidence interval of the pooled effect. Review and meta-analysis was conducted using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guideline. Main Outcomes and Measures: OS and CSS were compared between Black veterans and those who were not Black using pooled HRs. Results: Of 101 studies identified, 39 met inclusion criteria and 29 provided sufficient data for meta-analysis. The reported outcomes represented 603 256 veterans with cancer treated between 1983 and 2017, with a mean 29.0% (range, 8.9%-55.0%) of patients categorized as Black. All studies compared race by Black compared with White, except for 7 of 20 prostate cancer studies, which compared race by Black compared with non-Black. Black veterans were found to have better OS (HR, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.89-0.97) and CSS (HR, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.90-0.98). Survival advantages for Black veterans were observed across several cancer types, including bladder, laryngeal, lung, oropharyngeal, prostate, and plasma cell cancers. Between-study heterogeneity was low to moderate. Conclusions and Relevance: In this systematic review and meta-analysis of peer-reviewed publications reporting the outcomes of veterans receiving cancer care through VHA, survival outcomes were generally similar or better for Black compared with White or non-Black veterans. These findings suggest that integrated health care systems providing near-equitable access to comprehensive cancer care can substantially reduce or eliminate disparities in cancer outcomes.
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.