Background: Cancer incidence and mortality rates in the United States are declining, but this decrease may not be observed in rural areas where residents are more likely to live in poverty, smoke, and forego cancer screening. However, there is limited research exploring national rural-urban differences in cancer incidence and trends.Methods: We analyzed data from the North American Association of Central Cancer Registries' public use dataset, which includes population-based cancer incidence data from 46 states. We calculated age-adjusted incidence rates, rate ratios, and annual percentage change (APC) for: all cancers combined, selected individual cancers, and cancers associated with tobacco use and human papillomavirus (HPV). Rural-urban comparisons were made by demographic, geographic, and socioeconomic characteristics for 2009 to 2013. Trends were analyzed for 1995 to 2013.Results: Combined cancers incidence rates were generally higher in urban populations, except for the South, although the urban decline in incidence rate was greater than in rural populations (10.2% vs. 4.8%, respectively). Rural cancer disparities included higher rates of tobacco-associated, HPV-associated, lung and bronchus, cervical, and colorectal cancers across most population groups. Furthermore, HPV-associated cancer incidence rates increased in rural areas (APC = 0.724, P < 0.05), while temporal trends remained stable in urban areas.Conclusions: Cancer rates associated with modifiable risks-tobacco, HPV, and some preventive screening modalities (e.g., colorectal and cervical cancers)-were higher in rural compared with urban populations.Impact: Population-based, clinical, and/or policy strategies and interventions that address these modifiable risk factors could help reduce cancer disparities experienced in rural populations. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev; 27(11); 1265-74. ©2017 AACR.

/pdf/rural-urban-differences-in-cancer-incidence-and-trends-in-vh09m7q6no.pdf

Rural–Urban Differences in Cancer Incidence and Trends in the United States

The use of data from the real world to address clinical and policy-relevant questions that cannot be answered using data from clinical trials is garnering increased interest. Indeed, data from cancer registries and linked treatment records can provide unique insights into patients, treatments and outcomes in routine oncology practice. In this Review, we explore the quality of real-world data (RWD), provide a framework for the use of RWD and draw attention to the methodological pitfalls inherent to using RWD in studies of comparative effectiveness. Randomized controlled trials and RWD remain complementary forms of medical evidence; studies using RWD should not be used as substitutes for clinical trials. The comparison of outcomes between nonrandomized groups of patients who have received different treatments in routine practice remains problematic. Accordingly, comparative effectiveness studies need to be designed and interpreted very carefully. With due diligence, RWD can be used to identify and close gaps in health care, offering the potential for short-term improvement in health-care systems by enabling them to achieve the achievable.

Real-world data: towards achieving the achievable in cancer care

Purpose There are growing signs that the COVID-19 virus has started to spread to rural areas and can impact the rural health care system that is already stretched and lacks resources. To aid in the legislative decision process and proper channelizing of resources, we estimated and compared the county-level change in prevalence rates of COVID-19 by rural-urban status over 3 weeks. Additionally, we identified hotspots based on estimated prevalence rates. Methods We used crowdsourced data on COVID-19 and linked them to county-level demographics, smoking rates, and chronic diseases. We fitted a Bayesian hierarchical spatiotemporal model using the Markov Chain Monte Carlo algorithm in R-studio. We mapped the estimated prevalence rates using ArcGIS 10.8, and identified hotspots using Gettis-Ord local statistics. Findings In the rural counties, the mean prevalence of COVID-19 increased from 3.6 per 100,000 population to 43.6 per 100,000 within 3 weeks from April 3 to April 22, 2020. In the urban counties, the median prevalence of COVID-19 increased from 10.1 per 100,000 population to 107.6 per 100,000 within the same period. The COVID-19 adjusted prevalence rates in rural counties were substantially elevated in counties with higher black populations, smoking rates, and obesity rates. Counties with high rates of people aged 25-49 years had increased COVID-19 prevalence rates. Conclusions Our findings show a rapid spread of COVID-19 across urban and rural areas in 21 days. Studies based on quality data are needed to explain further the role of social determinants of health on COVID-19 prevalence.

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111/jrh.12486

Progression of COVID-19 From Urban to Rural Areas in the United States: A Spatiotemporal Analysis of Prevalence Rates.

People living in rural areas have worse health outcomes than their urban counterparts do. Understanding what factors account for this could inform policy interventions for reducing rural-urban disp...

Lack Of Access To Specialists Associated With Mortality And Preventable Hospitalizations Of Rural Medicare Beneficiaries.

One in every twenty-five persons in America is a racial/ethnic minority who lives in a rural area. Our objective was to summarize how racism and, subsequently, the social determinants of health disproportionately affect rural racial/ethnic minority populations, provide a review of the cancer disparities experienced by rural racial/ethnic minority groups, and recommend policy, research, and intervention approaches to reduce these disparities. We found that rural Black and American Indian/Alaska Native populations experience greater poverty and lack of access to care, which expose them to greater risk of developing cancer and experiencing poorer cancer outcomes in treatment and ultimately survival. There is a critical need for additional research to understand the disparities experienced by all rural racial/ethnic minority populations. We propose that policies aim to increase access to care and healthcare resources for these communities. Further, that observational and interventional research should more effectively address the intersections of rurality and race/ethnicity through reduced structural and interpersonal biases in cancer care, increased data access, more research on newer cancer screening and treatment modalities, and continued intervention and implementation research to understand how evidence-based practices can most effectively reduce disparities among these populations.

https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/18/4/1384/pdf

The Intersection of Rural Residence and Minority Race/Ethnicity in Cancer Disparities in the United States.

Rationale: There is increased lung cancer mortality in rural areas of the United States. However, it remains unclear to what extent rural–urban differences in disease incidence, stage at diagnosis, or treatment explain this finding.Objectives: To explore the relationship between smoking rates, lung cancer incidence, and lung cancer mortality in populations across the rural–urban continuum and to determine whether survival is decreased in rural patients diagnosed with lung cancer and whether this is associated with rural–urban differences in stage at diagnosis or the treatment received.Methods: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of 348,002 patients diagnosed with lung cancer between 2000 and 2006. Data from metropolitan, urban, suburban, and rural areas in the United States were obtained from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results program database. County-level population estimates for 2003 were obtained from the U.S. Census Bureau, and corresponding estimates of smoking prevalence were obt...

Taeha Kim

Papers

Residence in Rural Areas of the United States and Lung Cancer Mortality. Disease Incidence, Treatment Disparities, and Stage-Specific Survival