Historical redlining and clustering of present-day breast cancer factors.

IF 2.2 4区 医学 Q3 ONCOLOGY
Sarah M Lima, Tia M Palermo, Jared Aldstadt, Lili Tian, Helen C S Meier, Henry Taylor Louis, Heather M Ochs-Balcom
{"title":"Historical redlining and clustering of present-day breast cancer factors.","authors":"Sarah M Lima, Tia M Palermo, Jared Aldstadt, Lili Tian, Helen C S Meier, Henry Taylor Louis, Heather M Ochs-Balcom","doi":"10.1007/s10552-024-01950-9","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Historical redlining, a 1930s-era form of residential segregation and proxy of structural racism, has been associated with breast cancer risk, stage, and survival, but research is lacking on how known present-day breast cancer risk factors are related to historical redlining. We aimed to describe the clustering of present-day neighborhood-level breast cancer risk factors with historical redlining and evaluate geographic patterning across the US.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This ecologic study included US neighborhoods (census tracts) with Home Owners' Loan Corporation (HOLC) grades, defined as having a score in the Historic Redlining Score dataset; 2019 Population Level Analysis and Community EStimates (PLACES) data; and 2014-2016 Environmental Justice Index (EJI) data. Neighborhoods were defined as redlined if score ≥ 2.5. Prevalence quintiles of established adverse and protective breast cancer factors relating to behavior, environment, and socioeconomic status (SES) were used to classify neighborhoods as high-risk or not. Factor analysis grouped factors into domains. Overall and domain-specific scores were calculated for each neighborhood according to historical redlining status. Percent difference in score by historical redlining was used to assess differences in average scores, with Wilcoxon-Mann-Whitney test used to estimate significance. Kappa statistic was used to estimate concordance between historical redlining status and high-risk status. Heatmaps of scores were created to compare spatial clustering of high-risk factors to historical redlining.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We identified two domains: (1) behavior + SES; (2) healthcare. Across the US, redlined neighborhoods had significantly more breast cancer factors than non-redlined (redlined neighborhoods = 5.41 average high-risk factors vs. non-redlined = 3.55 average high-risk factors; p < 0.0001). Domain-specific results were similar (percent difference for redlined vs. non-redlined: 39.1% higher for behavior + SES scale; 23.1% higher for healthcare scale). High-scoring neighborhoods tended to spatially overlap with D-grades, with heterogeneity by scale and region.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Breast cancer risk factors clustered together more in historically redlined neighborhoods compared to non-redlined neighborhoods. Our findings suggest there are regional differences for which breast cancer factors cluster by historical redlining, therefore interventions aimed at redlining-based cancer disparities need to be tailored to the community.</p>","PeriodicalId":9432,"journal":{"name":"Cancer Causes & Control","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cancer Causes & Control","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10552-024-01950-9","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: Historical redlining, a 1930s-era form of residential segregation and proxy of structural racism, has been associated with breast cancer risk, stage, and survival, but research is lacking on how known present-day breast cancer risk factors are related to historical redlining. We aimed to describe the clustering of present-day neighborhood-level breast cancer risk factors with historical redlining and evaluate geographic patterning across the US.

Methods: This ecologic study included US neighborhoods (census tracts) with Home Owners' Loan Corporation (HOLC) grades, defined as having a score in the Historic Redlining Score dataset; 2019 Population Level Analysis and Community EStimates (PLACES) data; and 2014-2016 Environmental Justice Index (EJI) data. Neighborhoods were defined as redlined if score ≥ 2.5. Prevalence quintiles of established adverse and protective breast cancer factors relating to behavior, environment, and socioeconomic status (SES) were used to classify neighborhoods as high-risk or not. Factor analysis grouped factors into domains. Overall and domain-specific scores were calculated for each neighborhood according to historical redlining status. Percent difference in score by historical redlining was used to assess differences in average scores, with Wilcoxon-Mann-Whitney test used to estimate significance. Kappa statistic was used to estimate concordance between historical redlining status and high-risk status. Heatmaps of scores were created to compare spatial clustering of high-risk factors to historical redlining.

Results: We identified two domains: (1) behavior + SES; (2) healthcare. Across the US, redlined neighborhoods had significantly more breast cancer factors than non-redlined (redlined neighborhoods = 5.41 average high-risk factors vs. non-redlined = 3.55 average high-risk factors; p < 0.0001). Domain-specific results were similar (percent difference for redlined vs. non-redlined: 39.1% higher for behavior + SES scale; 23.1% higher for healthcare scale). High-scoring neighborhoods tended to spatially overlap with D-grades, with heterogeneity by scale and region.

Conclusion: Breast cancer risk factors clustered together more in historically redlined neighborhoods compared to non-redlined neighborhoods. Our findings suggest there are regional differences for which breast cancer factors cluster by historical redlining, therefore interventions aimed at redlining-based cancer disparities need to be tailored to the community.

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Cancer Causes & Control
Cancer Causes & Control 医学-公共卫生、环境卫生与职业卫生
CiteScore
3.90
自引率
4.30%
发文量
130
审稿时长
6.6 months
期刊介绍: Cancer Causes & Control is an international refereed journal that both reports and stimulates new avenues of investigation into the causes, control, and subsequent prevention of cancer. By drawing together related information published currently in a diverse range of biological and medical journals, it has a multidisciplinary and multinational approach. The scope of the journal includes: variation in cancer distribution within and between populations; factors associated with cancer risk; preventive and therapeutic interventions on a population scale; economic, demographic, and health-policy implications of cancer; and related methodological issues. The emphasis is on speed of publication. The journal will normally publish within 30 to 60 days of acceptance of manuscripts. Cancer Causes & Control publishes Original Articles, Reviews, Commentaries, Opinions, Short Communications and Letters to the Editor which will have direct relevance to researchers and practitioners working in epidemiology, medical statistics, cancer biology, health education, medical economics and related fields. The journal also contains significant information for government agencies concerned with cancer research, control and policy.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信