Cancer Medicine (Mar 2024)

Urban relatives ameliorate survival disparities for genitourinary cancer in rural patients

  • Mouneeb Choudry,
  • Kassandra Dindinger‐Hill,
  • Jacob Ambrose,
  • Joshua Horns,
  • Jeffrey Vehawn,
  • Hailie Gill,
  • Nicole Z. Murray,
  • Trevor C. Hunt,
  • Christopher Martin,
  • Benjamin Haaland,
  • Jonathan Chipman,
  • Heidi A. Hanson,
  • Brock B. O'Neil

DOI
https://doi.org/10.1002/cam4.7058
Journal volume & issue
Vol. 13, no. 5
pp. n/a – n/a

Abstract

Read online

Abstract Introduction Patients living in rural areas have worse cancer‐specific outcomes. This study examines the effect of family‐based social capital on genitourinary cancer survival. We hypothesized that rural patients with urban relatives have improved survival relative to rural patients without urban family. Methods We examined rural and urban based Utah individuals diagnosed with genitourinary cancers between 1968 and 2018. Familial networks were determined using the Utah Population Database. Patients and relatives were classified as rural or urban based on 2010 rural–urban commuting area codes. Overall survival was analyzed using Cox proportional hazards models. Results We identified 24,746 patients with genitourinary cancer with a median follow‐up of 8.72 years. Rural cancer patients without an urban relative had the worst outcomes with cancer‐specific survival hazard ratios (HRs) at 5 and 10 years of 1.33 (95% CI 1.10–1.62) and 1.46 (95% CI 1.24–1.73), respectively relative to urban patients. Rural patients with urban first‐degree relatives had improved survival with 5‐ and 10‐year survival HRs of 1.21 (95% CI 1.06–1.40) and 1.16 (95% CI 1.03–1.31), respectively. Conclusions Our findings suggest rural patients who have been diagnosed with a genitourinary cancer have improved survival when having relatives in urban centers relative to rural patients without urban relatives. Further research is needed to better understand the mechanisms through which having an urban family member contributes to improved cancer outcomes for rural patients. Better characterization of this affect may help inform policies to reduce urban–rural cancer disparities.

Keywords