Community-Guided Focus Group Analysis to Examine Cancer Disparities

Accountability for Cancer Care through Undoing Racism and Equity (ACCURE) is a systems-change intervention addressing disparities in treatment initiation and completion and outcomes for early stage Black and White breast and lung cancer patients. Using a community-based participatory research approach, ACCURE is guided by a diverse partnership involving academic researchers, a non-profit community-based organization, its affiliated broader-based community coalition, and providers and staff from two cancer centers

Effect of an Antiracism Intervention on Racial Disparities in Time to Lung Cancer Surgery

PURPOSE Timely lung cancer surgery is a metric of high-quality cancer care and improves survival for early-stage non-small-cell lung cancer. Historically, Black patients experience longer delays to surgery than White patients and have lower survival rates. Antiracism interventions have shown benefits in reducing racial disparities in lung cancer treatment.METHODSWe conducted a secondary analysis of Accountability for Cancer Care through Undoing Racism and Equity, an antiracism prospective pragmatic trial, at five cancer centers to assess the impact on overall timeliness of lung cancer surgery and racial disparities in timely surgery. The intervention consisted of (1) a real-time warning system to identify unmet care milestones, (2) race-specific feedback on lung cancer treatment rates, and (3) patient navigation. The primary outcome was surgery within 8 weeks of diagnosis. Risk ratios (RRs) and 95% CIs were estimated using log-binomial regression and adjusted for clinical and demographic factors.RESULTSA total of 2,363 patients with stage I and II non-small-cell lung cancer were included in the analyses: intervention (n = 263), retrospective control (n = 1,798), and concurrent control (n = 302). 87.1% of Black patients and 85.4% of White patients in the intervention group (P =.13) received surgery within 8 weeks of diagnosis compared with 58.7% of Black patients and 75.0% of White patients in the retrospective group (P <.01) and 64.9% of Black patients and 73.2% of White patients (P =.29) in the concurrent group. Black patients in the intervention group were more likely to receive timely surgery than Black patients in the retrospective group (RR 1.43; 95% CI, 1.26 to 1.64). White patients in the intervention group also had timelier surgery than White patients in the retrospective group (RR 1.10; 95% CI, 1.02 to 1.18). CONCLUSION Accountability for Cancer Care through Undoing Racism and Equity is associated with timelier lung cancer surgery and reduction of the racial gap in timely surgery

Hilliard C. Yongue Family Papers - Accession 662 - M292 (343)

The Hilliard C. Yongue Family Papers consists of a genealogy and history of the Yongue Family of Chester, SC descended from Hilliard Calamanchus Yongue (1832-1896) and covers the years 1806 through 1992.https://digitalcommons.winthrop.edu/manuscriptcollection_findingaids/1566/thumbnail.jp

Community-Guided Focus Group Analysis to Examine Cancer Disparities

BACKGROUND: Accountability for Cancer Care through Undoing Racism and Equity (ACCURE) is a systems-change intervention addressing disparities in treatment initiation and completion and outcomes for early stage Black and White breast and lung cancer patients. Using a community-based participatory research approach, ACCURE is guided by a diverse partnership involving academic researchers, a non-profit community-based organization, its affiliated broader-based community coalition, and providers and staff from two cancer centers. OBJECTIVES: This paper describes the collaborative process our partnership used to conduct focus groups and to code and analyze the data to inform two components of the ACCURE intervention: 1) a “power analysis” of the cancer care system, and 2) the development of the intervention’s training component, Healthcare Equity Education and Trainings, for cancer center providers and staff. METHODS: Utilizing active involvement of community and academic partners at every stage in the process, we engaged Black and White breast and lung cancer survivors at two partner cancer centers in eight focus group discussions organized by race and cancer type. Participants were asked to describe “pressure point encounters” or critical incidents during their journey through the cancer system that facilitated or hindered their willingness to continue treatment. Community and academic members collaborated to plan and develop materials, conduct focus groups, and code and analyze data. CONCLUSIONS: A collaborative qualitative data analysis process strengthened the capacity of our community-medical-academic partnership, enriched our research moving forward, and enhanced the transparency and accountability of our research approach