Dataset Information

Association of Variation in US County-Level Rates of Liver Surgical Resection for Colorectal Liver Metastasis With Poverty Rates in 2010.

ABSTRACT:

Importance

Among patients with colorectal liver metastasis (CRLM) who are eligible for curative-intent liver surgical resection, only half undergo liver metastasectomy. It is currently unclear how rates of liver metastasectomy vary geographically in the US. Geographic differences in county-level socioeconomic characteristics may, in part, explain variability in the receipt of liver metastasectomy for CRLM.

Objective

To describe county-level variation in the receipt of liver metastasectomy for CRLM in the US and its association with poverty rates.

Design, setting, and participants

This ecological, cross-sectional, and county-level analysis was conducted using data from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Research Plus database. The study included the county-level proportion of patients who had colorectal adenocarcinoma diagnosed between January 1, 2010, and December 31, 2018, underwent primary surgical resection, and had liver metastasis without extrahepatic metastasis. The county-level proportion of patients with stage I colorectal cancer (CRC) was used as a comparator. Data analysis was performed on March 2, 2022.

Exposures

County-level poverty in 2010 obtained from the US Census (proportion of county population below the federal poverty level).

Main outcomes and measures

The primary outcome was county-level odds of liver metastasectomy for CRLM. The comparator outcome was county-level odds of surgical resection for stage I CRC. Multivariable binomial logistic regression accounting for clustering of outcomes within a county via an overdispersion parameter was used to estimate the county-level odds of receiving a liver metastasectomy for CRLM associated with a 10% increase in poverty rate.

Results

In the 194 US counties included in this study, there were 11 348 patients. At the county level, the majority of the population was male (mean [SD], 56.9% [10.2%]), White (71.9% [20.0%]), and aged between 50 and 64 (38.1% [11.0%]) or 65 and 79 (33.6% [11.4%]) years. The adjusted odds of undergoing a liver metastasectomy was lower in counties with higher poverty in 2010 (per 10% increase; odds ratio, 0.82 [95% CI, 0.69-0.96]; P = .02). County-level poverty was not associated with receipt of surgery for stage I CRC. Despite the difference in rates of surgery (mean county-level rates were 0.24 for liver metastasectomy for CRLM and 0.75 for surgery for stage I CRC), the variance at the county-level for these 2 surgical procedures was similar (F370, 193 = 0.81; P = .08).

Conclusions and relevance

The findings of this study suggest that higher poverty was associated with lower receipt of liver metastasectomy among US patients with CRLM. Surgery for a more common and less complex cancer comparator (ie, stage I CRC) was not observed to be associated with county-level poverty rates. However, county-level variation in surgical rates was similar for CRLM and stage I CRC. These findings further suggest that access to surgical care for complex gastrointestinal cancers such as CRLM may be partially influenced by where patients live.

SUBMITTER: Molina G

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9972196 | biostudies-literature | 2023 Feb

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Association of Variation in US County-Level Rates of Liver Surgical Resection for Colorectal Liver Metastasis With Poverty Rates in 2010.

Molina George G Ruan Mengyuan M Lipsitz Stuart R SR Iyer Hari S HS Hassett Michael J MJ Brindle Mary E ME Trinh Quoc-Dien QD

JAMA network open 20230201 2

<h4>Importance</h4>Among patients with colorectal liver metastasis (CRLM) who are eligible for curative-intent liver surgical resection, only half undergo liver metastasectomy. It is currently unclear how rates of liver metastasectomy vary geographically in the US. Geographic differences in county-level socioeconomic characteristics may, in part, explain variability in the receipt of liver metastasectomy for CRLM.<h4>Objective</h4>To describe county-level variation in the receipt of liver metast ...[more]

PMID: 36848088

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThe highly variable occurrence of primary liver cancers across the United States emphasize the relevance of location-based factors. Social determinants such as income, educational attainment, housing, and other factors may contribute to regional variations in outcomes. To evaluate their impact, this study identified and analyzed clusters of high mortality from primary liver cancers and the association of location-based determinants with mortality across the contiguous United States.MethodsA geospatial analysis of age-adjusted incidence and standardized mortality rates from primary liver cancers from 2000 to 2020 was performed. Local indicators of spatial association identified hot-spots, clusters of counties with significantly higher mortality. Temporal analysis of locations with persistent poverty, defined as high (>20%) poverty for at least 30 years, was performed. Social determinants were analyzed individually or globally using composite measures such as the social vulnerability index or social deprivation index. Disparities in county level social determinants between hot-spots and non-hot-spots were analyzed by univariate and multivariate logistic regression.ResultsThere are distinct clusters of liver cancer incidence and mortality, with hotspots in east Texas and Louisiana. The percentage of people living below the poverty line or Hispanics had a significantly higher odds ratio for being in the top quintile for mortality rates in comparison to other quintiles and were highly connected with mortality rates. Current and persistent poverty were both associated with an evolution from non-hotspots to new hotspots of mortality. Hotspots were predominantly associated with locations with significant levels of socioeconomic vulnerability or deprivation.ConclusionsPoverty at a county level is associated with mortality from primary liver cancer and clusters of higher mortality. These findings emphasize the importance of addressing poverty and related socio-economic determinants as modifiable factors in public health policies and interventions aimed at reducing mortality from primary liver cancers.

Project description:ImportancePreterm birth is a leading cause of preventable neonatal morbidity and mortality. Preterm birth rates at the national level may mask important geographic variation in rates and trends at the county level.ObjectiveTo estimate age-standardized preterm birth rates by US county from 2007 to 2019.Design, setting, and participantsThis serial cross-sectional study used data from the National Center for Health Statistics composed of all live births in the US between 2007 and 2019. Data analyses were performed between March 22, 2022, and September 29, 2022.Main outcomes and measuresAge-standardized preterm birth (<37 weeks' gestation) and secondarily early preterm birth (<34 weeks' gestation) rates by county and year calculated with a validated small area estimation model (hierarchical bayesian spatiotemporal model) and percent change in preterm birth rates using log-linear regression models.ResultsBetween 2007 and 2019, there were 51 044 482 live births in 2383 counties. In 2007, the national age-standardized preterm birth rate was 12.6 (95% CI, 12.6-12.7) per 100 live births. Preterm birth rates varied significantly among counties, with an absolute difference between the 90th and 10th percentile counties of 6.4 (95% CI, 6.2-6.7). The gap between the highest and lowest counties for preterm births was 20.7 per 100 live births in 2007. Several counties in the Southeast consistently had the highest preterm birth rates compared with counties in California and New England, which had the lowest preterm birth rates. Although there was no statistically significant change in preterm birth rates between 2007 and 2019 at the national level (percent change, -5.0%; 95% CI, -10.7% to 0.9%), increases occurred in 15.4% (95% CI, 14.1%-16.9%) of counties. The absolute and relative geographic inequalities were similar across all maternal age groups. Higher quartile of the Social Vulnerability Index was associated with higher preterm birth rates (quartile 4 vs quartile 1 risk ratio, 1.34; 95% CI, 1.31-1.36), which persisted across the study period. Similar patterns were observed for early preterm birth rates.Conclusions and relevanceIn this serial cross-sectional study of county-level preterm and early preterm birth rates, substantial geographic disparities were observed, which were associated with place-based social disadvantage. Stability in aggregated rates of preterm birth at the national level masked increases in nearly 1 in 6 counties between 2007 and 2019.

Project description:BackgroundGeographic and neighborhood-level factors, such as poverty and education, have been associated with an increased risk for incident ESKD, likelihood of receiving pre-ESKD care, and likelihood of receiving a transplant. However, few studies have examined whether these same factors are associated with ESKD mortality. In this study, we examined county-level variation in ESKD mortality and identified county-level characteristics associated with this variation.MethodsWe identified 1,515,986 individuals (aged 18-84 years) initiating RRT (dialysis or transplant) between 2010 and 2018 using the United States Renal Data System. Among 2781 counties, we estimated county-level, all-cause, age-standardized mortality rates (ASMR) among patients with ESKD. We then identified county-level demographic (e.g., percent female), socioeconomic (e.g., percent unemployed), healthcare (e.g., percent without health insurance), and health behavior (e.g., percent current smokers) characteristics associated with ASMR using multivariable hierarchic linear mixed models and quantified the percentage of ASMR variation explained by county-level characteristics.ResultsCounty-level ESKD ASMR ranged from 45 to 1022 per 1000 person-years (PY) (mean, 119 per 1000 PY). ASMRs were highest in counties located in the Tennessee Valley and Appalachia regions, and lowest in counties located in New England, the Pacific Northwest, and Southern California. In fully adjusted models, county-level characteristics significantly associated with higher ESKD mortality included a lower percentage of Black residents (-4.94 per 1000 PY), lower transplant rate (-4.08 per 1000 PY), and higher healthcare expenditures (5.21 per 1000 PY). Overall, county-level characteristics explained 19% of variation in ESKD mortality.ConclusionsCounties with high ESKD-related mortality may benefit from targeted and multilevel interventions that combine knowledge from a growing evidence base on the interplay between individual and community-level factors associated with ESKD mortality.

Project description:ImportanceYouth firearm-related deaths are a public health crisis in the US. The association between county-level poverty and the risk of firearm-related deaths among youth is unknown, however.ObjectiveTo examine the association between county-level poverty concentration and firearm-related mortality rates in US youth.Design, setting, and participantsThis cross-sectional study analyzed US firearm fatalities in children and young adults aged 5 to 24 years that occurred between January 1, 2007, and December 31, 2016. Data were obtained from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's Compressed Mortality File, and annual intercensal county population data were obtained from the US Census Bureau. Data analyses were conducted between November 1, 2019, and June 30, 2020.ExposuresCounty-level poverty was categorized into 5 groups: 0% to 4.9%, 5% to 9.9%, 10% to 14.9%, 15% to 19.9%, and ≥20% of the population living below the federal poverty level.Main outcomes and measuresThe main outcomes were firearm-related deaths in total and by specific intent (homicide, suicide, and unintentional) per 100 000 youths over the entire study period. Multivariable negative binomial regression models were used to analyze the association between firearm-related mortality rates and county poverty concentration, controlling for demographic variables, urbanicity, and statewide firearm prevalence. Adjusted incidence rate ratios (IRRs) were calculated, and statewide firearm prevalence was estimated. The population-attributable fraction (PAF) and years of potential life lost for each intent were calculated.ResultsA total of 67 905 firearm-related deaths among youth (predominantly composed of 60 164 male individuals [88.6%]) from 2007 to 2016 were analyzed. Of these deaths, 42 512 were homicides (62.6%), 23 034 were suicides (33.9%), and 1627 were unintentional (2.4%). Firearm-related mortality risk increased in a stepwise manner with increasing county poverty concentration. Compared with counties with the lowest poverty concentration, counties with the highest poverty concentration had an increased rate of total firearm-related deaths (adjusted IRR, 2.29; 95% CI, 1.96-2.67), homicides (adjusted IRR, 3.55; 95% CI, 2.80-4.51), suicides (adjusted IRR, 1.45; 95% CI, 1.20-1.75), and unintentional deaths (adjusted IRR, 9.32; 95% CI, 2.32-37.4). The PAF was 0.51 (95% CI, 0.43-0.57) for all firearm-related deaths, 0.66 (95% CI, 0.57-0.73) for homicides, 0.30 (95% CI, 0.17-0.42) for suicides, and 0.86 (95% CI, 0.46-0.97) for unintentional deaths. This calculation translated to 34 292 firearm-related deaths that would not have occurred if all counties had the same risk as counties with the lowest poverty concentration. A total of 3 833 105 years of potential life lost was observed.Conclusions and relevanceThis study found an association between firearm-related mortality rates among youth and county-level poverty concentration. With more than half of firearm-related deaths and two-thirds of firearm-related homicides potentially associated with living in an area with a high concentration of poverty, a multidimensional strategy to reduce poverty and firearm-related deaths is urgently needed.

Project description:ImportanceSuicide is the second leading cause of death among youths aged 10 to 19 years in the United States, with rates nearly doubling during the past decade. Youths in impoverished communities are at increased risk for negative health outcomes; however, the association between pediatric suicide and poverty is not well understood.ObjectiveTo assess the association between pediatric suicide rates and county-level poverty concentration.Design, setting, and participantsThis retrospective, cross-sectional study examined suicides among US youths aged 5 to 19 years from January 1, 2007, to December 31, 2016. Suicides were identified using International Statistical Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision, Clinical Modification codes from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's Compressed Mortality File. Data analysis was performed from February 1, 2019, to September 10, 2019.ExposuresCounty poverty concentration and the percentage of the population living below the federal poverty level. Counties were divided into 5 poverty concentration categories: 0% to 4.9%, 5.0% to 9.9%, 10.0% to 14.9%, 15.0% to 19.9%, and 20.0% or more of the population living below the federal poverty level.Main outcomes and measuresThe study used a multivariable negative binomial regression model to analyze the association between pediatric suicide rates and county poverty concentration, reporting adjusted incidence rate ratios (aIRRs) with 95% CIs. The study controlled for year, demographic characteristics of the children who died (age, sex, and race/ethnicity), county urbanicity, and county demographic features (age, sex, and racial composition). Subgroup analyses were stratified by method.ResultsFrom 2007 to 2016, a total of 20 982 youths aged 5 to 19 years died by suicide (17 760 [84.6%] were aged 15-19 years, 15 982 [76.2%] male, and 14 387 [68.6%] white non-Hispanic). The annual suicide rate was 3.35 per 100 000 youths aged 5 to 19 years. In the multivariable model, compared with counties with the lowest poverty concentration (0%-4.9%), counties with poverty concentrations of 10% or greater had higher suicide rates in a stepwise manner (10.0%-14.9%: aIRR, 1.25 [95% CI, 1.06-1.47]; 15.0%-19.9%: aIRR, 1.30 [95% CI, 1.10-1.54]; and 20.0% or more: aIRR, 1.37 [95% CI, 1.15-1.64]). When stratified by method, firearm suicides had the strongest association with county poverty concentration (aIRR, 1.87; 95% CI, 1.41-2.49) in counties with 20% or higher poverty concentration compared with counties with 0% to 4.9% poverty concentration.Conclusions and relevanceThe findings suggest that higher county-level poverty concentration is associated with increased suicide rates among youths aged 5 to 19 years. These findings may guide research into upstream risk factors associated with pediatric suicide to inform suicide prevention efforts.

Project description:ImportanceFirearm violence remains a critical public health challenge, disproportionately impacting some US regions. County-level variation may hold key insights into how firearm mortality rates vary across the US.ObjectiveTo model county-level changes in firearm mortality rates (total, homicide, and suicide) from 1989 to 1993 vs 2015 to 2019 and identify and characterize hot spots showing unexpected changes over time.Design, setting, and participantsThis is a cross-sectional study with 2 time points using a novel small area estimation method to analyze restricted access mortality microdata by cause of death and US county. The analysis included 3111 US counties from 49 states and the District of Columbia from January 1, 1989, to December 31, 2019. Bayesian spatial models were fitted to map geographical variation in changes in age-standardized firearm mortality rates (per 100 000 person-years) from 1989 to 1993 vs 2015 to 2019. County outliers (or hot spots) were defined as having observed rates that fell outside the 95% credible intervals of their expected posterior predictive distribution. These counties were characterized using visualization and descriptive statistics of their characteristics. Data were analyzed from June to December 2021.ExposuresCounty of residence.Main outcomes and measuresFive-year age-standardized mortality rates by US county, age, and cause of death for 1989 to 1993 and 2015 to 2019.ResultsBetween 1989 and 2019, 1 036 518 firearm deaths were recorded in counties across the US. Suicide was the most common cause of firearm mortality (589 285 deaths) followed by homicide (412 231 deaths). Age-standardized rates (deaths per 100 000 individuals) for firearm deaths and suicides increased from 1989 to 1993 vs 2015 to 2019 (mean [SD] change, 0.16 [8.78] for firearm deaths and 1.21 [6.91] for suicides), while firearm homicides decreased (mean [SD] change, -0.39 [3.96]). However, these national trends were not homogeneous across counties and often varied by geographical region. The West and Midwest showed the most pronounced increases in firearm suicide rates, whereas the Southeast showed localized increases in firearm homicide rates, despite the national decreasing trend. Critical hot spots were identified in urban counties of Alabama, and firearm homicide rates (per 100 000) in Baltimore City, Maryland, almost doubled from 29.71 to 47.43, and by 2015 to 2019 it accounted for 66.7% of all firearm homicide in Maryland. By contrast, District of Columbia showed promising improvements over time, decreasing from 56.5 firearm homicides per 100 000 in 1989 to 1993 to 14.45 in 2015 to 2019.Conclusions and relevanceThere was substantial variation in rates and changes in firearm deaths among US counties. Geographical hot spots may be useful to inform targeted prevention efforts and local policy responses.

Project description:ImportanceObesity is a leading cause of high health care expenditures, disability, and premature mortality. Previous studies have documented geographic disparities in obesity prevalence.ObjectiveTo identify county-level factors associated with obesity using traditional epidemiologic and machine learning methods.Design, setting, and participantsCross-sectional study using linear regression models and machine learning models to evaluate the associations between county-level obesity and county-level demographic, socioeconomic, health care, and environmental factors from summarized statistical data extracted from the 2018 Robert Wood Johnson Foundation County Health Rankings and merged with US Census data from each of 3138 US counties. The explanatory power of the linear multivariate regression and the top performing machine learning model were compared using mean R2 measured in 30-fold cross validation.ExposuresCounty-level demographic factors (population; rural status; census region; and race/ethnicity, sex, and age composition), socioeconomic factors (median income, unemployment rate, and percentage of population with some college education), health care factors (rate of uninsured adults and primary care physicians), and environmental factors (access to healthy foods and access to exercise opportunities).Main outcomes and measuresCounty-level obesity prevalence in 2018, its association with each county-level factor, and the percentage of variation in county-level obesity prevalence explained by linear multivariate and gradient boosting machine regression measured with R2.ResultsAmong the 3138 counties studied, the mean (range) obesity prevalence was 31.5% (12.8%-47.8%). In multivariate regressions, demographic factors explained 44.9% of variation in obesity prevalence; socioeconomic factors, 33.0%; environmental factors, 15.5%; and health care factors, 9.1%. The county-level factors with the strongest association with obesity were census region, median household income, and percentage of population with some college education. R2 values of univariate regressions of obesity prevalence were 0.238 for census region, 0.218 for median household income, and 0.160 for percentage of population with some college education. Multivariate linear regression and gradient boosting machine regression (the best-performing machine learning model) of obesity prevalence using all county-level demographic, socioeconomic, health care, and environmental factors had R2 values of 0.58 and 0.66, respectively (P < .001).Conclusions and relevanceObesity prevalence varies significantly between counties. County-level demographic, socioeconomic, health care, and environmental factors explain the majority of variation in county-level obesity prevalence. Using machine learning models may explain significantly more of the variation in obesity prevalence..

Project description:BackgroundDebates over the importance of "lifestyle" versus "environment" contributions to cancer have been going on for over 40 years. While it is clear that cigarette smoking is the most significant cancer risk factor, the contributions of occupational and environmental carcinogens in air, water and food remain controversial. In practice, most cancer prevention messaging focuses on reducing cigarette smoking and changing other personal behaviors with little mention of environmental chemicals, despite widespread exposure to many known carcinogens. To inform decision-making on cancer prevention priorities, we evaluated the potential impact of smoking cessation on cancer rates.MethodsUsing cancer incidence data from 612 counties in the SEER database, and county-level smoking prevalences, we investigated the impact of smoking cessation on incidence for 12 smoking-related cancer types, 2006-2016. A multilevel mixed-effects regression model quantified the association between county-level smoking prevalence and cancer incidence, adjusting for age, gender and variability over time and among counties. We simulated complete smoking cessation and estimated the effects on county-level cancer rates.ResultsRegression models showed the expected strong association between smoking prevalence and cancer incidence. Simulating complete smoking cessation, the incidence of the 12 smoking-related cancer types fell by 39.8% (54.9% for airways cancers; 28.9% for non-airways cancers). And, while the actual rates of smoking-related cancers from 2006 to 2016 declined (annual percent change (APC) = - 0.8, 95% CI = - 1.0 to - 0.5%), under the scenario of smoking elimination, the trend in cancer incidence at these sites was not declining (APC = - 0.1, 95% CI = - 0.4 to + 0.1%). Not all counties were predicted to benefit equally from smoking elimination, and cancer rates would fall less than 10% in some counties.ConclusionsSmoking prevention has produced dramatic reductions in cancer in the US for 12 major types. However, we estimate that eliminating smoking completely would not affect about 60% of cancer cases of the 12 smoking-related types, leaving no improvement in the incidence trend from 2006 to 2016. We conclude that cancer prevention strategies should focus not only on lifestyle changes but also the likely contributions of the full range of risk factors, including environmental/occupational carcinogens.

Dataset Information

Association of Variation in US County-Level Rates of Liver Surgical Resection for Colorectal Liver Metastasis With Poverty Rates in 2010.

Importance

Objective

Design, setting, and participants

Exposures

Main outcomes and measures

Results

Conclusions and relevance

Publications

Association of Variation in US County-Level Rates of Liver Surgical Resection for Colorectal Liver Metastasis With Poverty Rates in 2010.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets