Ovarian Cancer Epidemiology, Healthcare Access and Disparities (ORCHiD): Methodology for a Population-Based Study of Black, Hispanic and White Patients with Ovarian Cancer

INTRODUCTION: Less than 40% of patients with ovarian cancer (OC) in the USA receive stage-appropriate guideline-adherent surgery and chemotherapy. Black patients with cancer report greater depression, pain and fatigue than white patients. Lack of access to healthcare likely contributes to low treatment rates and racial differences in outcomes. The Ovarian Cancer Epidemiology, Healthcare Access and Disparities study aims to characterise healthcare access (HCA) across five specific dimensions-Availability, Affordability, Accessibility, Accommodation and Acceptability-among black, Hispanic and white patients with OC, evaluate the impact of HCA on quality of treatment, supportive care and survival, and explore biological mechanisms that may contribute to OC disparities. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We will use the Surveillance Epidemiology and Ends Results dataset linked with Medicare claims data from 9744 patients with OC ages 65 years and older. We will recruit 1641 patients with OC (413 black, 299 Hispanic and 929 white) from cancer registries in nine US states. We will examine HCA dimensions in relation to three main outcomes: (1) receipt of quality, guideline adherent initial treatment and supportive care, (2) quality of life based on patient-reported outcomes and (3) survival. We will obtain saliva and vaginal microbiome samples to examine prognostic biomarkers. We will use hierarchical regression models to estimate the impact of HCA dimensions across patient, neighbourhood, provider and hospital levels, with random effects to account for clustering. Multilevel structural equation models will estimate the total, direct and indirect effects of race on treatment mediated through HCA dimensions. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Result dissemination will occur through presentations at national meetings and in collaboration with collaborators, community partners and colleagues across othercancer centres. We will disclose findings to key stakeholders, including scientists, providers and community members. This study has been approved by the Duke Institutional Review Board (Pro00101872). Safety considerations include protection of patient privacy. All disseminated data will be deidentified and summarised

Hypertensive Disorders of Pregnancy: Common Clinical Conundrums

Importance: Hypertensive complications of pregnancy comprise 16% of maternal deaths in developed countries and 7.4% of deaths in the United States. Rates of preeclampsia increased 25% from 1987 to 2004, and rates of severe preeclampsia have increased 6.7-fold between 1980 and 2003. Objective: The aim of this study was to review current and available evidence for common clinical questions regarding the management of hypertensive disorders of pregnancy. Evidence Acquisition: Original research articles, review articles, and guidelines on hypertension in pregnancy were reviewed. Results: Severe gestational hypertension should be managed as preeclampsia with severe features. Serum uric acid levels can be useful in predicting development of superimposed preeclampsia for women with chronic hypertension. When presenting with preeclampsia with severe features before 34 weeks, expectant management should be considered only when both maternal and fetal conditions are stable. In the setting of hypertensive disorders of pregnancy, oral antihypertensive medications should be initiated when systolic blood pressure is greater than 160 mm Hg or when diastolic blood pressure is greater than 110 mm Hg, with the most ideal agents being labetalol or nifedipine. Furthermore, although risk of preeclampsia recurrence in future pregnancy is low, women with a history of preeclampsia should be managed with 81 mg aspirin daily for preeclampsia prevention. Conclusions and Relevance: Despite the frequency with which hypertensive disorders of pregnancy are encountered clinically, situations arise frequently with limited evidence to guide providers in their management. An urgent need exists to better understand this disease to optimize outcomes for impacted patients