Blog Post 12 (Week 14) - Racial disparities in cancer for people under 40 are significant

Racial disparities

For my final blog post, I will be analyzing a scientific article by US News & World Report titled "When Cancer Strikes Those Under 40, Race Matters" by Amy Norton.

Summary of Article:

This article reports on a study that found that "young Black and Hispanic cancer patients face poorer survival odds than their white counterparts, even from some cancers that are highly curable." While survival rates of cancer have improved in all races over the last couple decades, Black and Hispanic young people consistently had worse outcomes than their white counterparts. Black Texans, especially, faced stark differences in survival. For a blood cancer, almost 75% of white men survived after five years, compared to only 57% Black men and 67% Hispanic men. Disparities in young people's health insurance coverage are correlated with poorer survival rates. Because many young Americans are uninsured, their cancer may not be diagnosed until later. If they do not have access to health care coverage expansion (such as in Texas), they are less likely to fare well with cancer, compared to people with private insurance. 

Science in Article:

The first scientific article I found relevant to the news article is titled, "Lack of reduction in racial disparities in cancer‐specific mortality over a 20‐year period" by Aizer et al. This study sought to determine whether racial disparities in "cancer-specific mortality" have improved within the last two decades. They found that the gap for African Americans has not closed over time. Improving access to care is a suggestion made by the scientists in this article to address racial disparities, which is consistent with the proposed trends and solutions discussed in the news article.

The second article I found is titled, "Racial disparities in cancer therapy" by Gross et al. This study focused on racial disparities in actual cancer treatment/therapy, and found that black patients were significantly less likely than white patients to receive therapy for cancers of the lung, breast, colon, and prostate. With little improvement in the proportion Medicare beneficiaries or the size of racial disparities, the study concludes that "efforts in the last decade to mitigate cancer therapy disparities appear to have been unsuccessful." This again is consistent with the news article's report on racial disparities in cancer.

Finally, a third article I found relevant to the news article is titled, "Health disparities and cancer: racial disparities in cancer mortality in the United States, 2000–2010" by Keefe et al. This study provided a general report about the disparities in race regarding cancer and some of the possible sources of the disparities. Among individuals with lower socioeconomic status, smoking was more prevalent. Early detection methods are lower for some groups, as well as access to advanced cancer therapies. The Affordable Care Act is promising in helping more people receive care, but it is limited in addressing "underlying societal inequities." Many of the claims made in the news article are backed up by this scientific article, lending further credibility to the news article.

Assessment: Was Science Misused?

After analyzing three related scientific articles, I believe that the science was not misused in this news article. Many scientists have affirmed the presence of racial disparities in healthcare, particularly with regard to cancer mortality and treatments. The studies I have analyzed also pointed to social inequalities, such as racial biases in medicine that lead to differences in treatment, and lack of affordable healthcare for  many younger people, to be some of the main causes of racial disparities in younger people diagnosed with cancer. I think this news article does a good job of drawing attention to the severity of racial disparities and the importance of being aware of them in order to provide equitable healthcare for everyone.

Thanks for reading!