Demographic Disparities in Lung Cancer Mortality and Trends in the United States From 1999 Through 2020: A Population-Based CDC Database Analysis

Authors:
Alexander J. Didier The University of Toledo College of Medicine and Life Sciences, Toledo, OH

Search for other papers by Alexander J. Didier in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
 BS
,
Logan Roof Department of Hematology and Medical Oncology, Cleveland Clinic Taussig Cancer Institute, Cleveland, OH

Search for other papers by Logan Roof in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
 MD
, and
James Stevenson Department of Hematology and Medical Oncology, Cleveland Clinic Taussig Cancer Institute, Cleveland, OH

Search for other papers by James Stevenson in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
 MD
Full access

Background: Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer-related mortality in the United States and is projected to account for 127,070 deaths in 2023. Although the lung cancer mortality rate has been decreasing over the last decade, demographic disparities in mortality still exist. We sought to determine the impact of demographic factors on lung cancer mortality and trends in the United States. Patients and Methods: We queried the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) database for mortality statistics with an underlying cause of death of lung and bronchus cancer from 1999 through 2020. Age-adjusted mortality rates (AAMR) were calculated per 100,000 people. We assessed the AAMR by demographic variables, including race, geographic density, sex, age, and US census region. Temporal trends were evaluated using Joinpoint regression software, and average annual percent change (APC) was calculated. Results: From 1999 through 2020, lung cancer led to 3,380,830 deaths. The AAMR decreased by 55.1 to 31.8, with an associated average APC of −2.6%. In 1999, men had an AAMR almost twice as high as women, but these differences became less pronounced over time. Rural populations experienced the highest AAMR and the slowest rate of decrease compared with urban populations, who experienced the lowest AAMR and fastest decrease. Non-Hispanic Black individuals experienced the highest AAMR, with an annual decrease of −3.0%. The West experienced the fastest decrease at −3.1% annually, whereas the Midwest experienced the slowest decrease at −2.0% annually. Conclusions: Although the mortality rate of lung cancer has been decreasing since 1999, not all demographic groups have experienced the same rates of decrease, and disparities in outcomes are still prevalent. Vulnerable subgroups need targeted interventions, such as the incorporation of patient navigators, improved screening chest CT scan access and follow-up, and telehealth expansion, which will improve the likelihood of earlier-stage diagnoses and the potential for curative treatments.

Background

Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer-related mortality in the United States and is projected to account for 127,070 deaths in 2023.1 Lung cancer is comprised of 2 major histologic subtypes: non–small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and small cell lung cancer.2 The rates of lung cancer by histologic type are influenced by several factors, including sex and race.3,4 Risk factors for lung cancer include cigarette smoking, radon exposure, secondhand smoke, genetics, and diet, and all play a significant role in the pathogenesis of the disease.5 Despite advances in treatment modalities and a decrease in lung cancer incidence, lung cancer remains the leading cause of cancer-related mortality in the United States.6 Lung cancer is associated with significant financial burden and economic impairment, which have led to an increasing focus on screening and the development of novel treatments.7

Despite the significant burden that lung cancer causes nationally, there are variations in contemporary mortality estimates in the United States. Furthermore, geographic trends in lung cancer mortality are largely understudied, which is especially important in light of recent concerns regarding regional disparities in screening access and compliance.8 We analyzed a nationwide database linked to death certificates to describe the trends in lung cancer mortality in the United States from 1999 through 2020.

Patients and Methods

Dataset

The CDC Wide-Ranging Online Data for Epidemiologic Research (WONDER) database was queried for mortality statistics with an underlying cause of death of lung and bronchus cancer (ICD-10 code C34.0.×) from 1999 through 2020. The CDC WONDER database uses mortality statistics collected from death certificates at the time of death and has been used in other studies assessing cancer mortality in the United States.9,10 The data are publicly available online through the CDC WONDER website (https://wonder.cdc.gov). This study did not require Institutional Review Board approval because CDC WONDER is a publicly available database that contains deidentified data.

We extracted data for lung cancer–related deaths from 1999 through 2020. Data were grouped based on demographic and regional variables. We assessed mortality by race (including Hispanic, non-Hispanic White, non-Hispanic Black or African American, non-Hispanic Asian or Pacific Islander, and non-Hispanic American Indian or Alaska Native), geographic density (urban [population ≥1 million], suburban [population 50,000–999,999], and rural [population <50,000]) based on the 2013 US census classification, sex (male or female), age (25–44, 45–64, or ≥65 years), and US census region. Regions were classified into Northeast, Midwest, South, and West according to the US Census Bureau definitions.11

Statistical Analysis

Lung cancer age-adjusted mortality rates (AAMRs) per 100,000 people were calculated and standardized to the year 2000 United States population.12 The Joinpoint Regression Program (NCI) was used to determine temporal trends in AAMR. Annual percent change (APC) was calculated. Joinpoint regression identifies significant changes in AAMR over time by using a Monte Carlo permutation method to identify an optimal number of joinpoints, which are line segments connecting 2 data points.13 Next, the model segments the entire time period by those joinpoints and estimates an APC for each segment. APCs were considered increasing or decreasing if the slope describing the change in mortality was significantly different than 0 using 2‐tailed t testing. Statistical significance was set at P<.05.

The data analyzed in this study were obtained from the CDC WONDER underlying cause of death database (available at https://wonder.cdc.gov/ucd-icd10.html).

Results

From 1999 through 2020, lung cancer led to 3,380,830 deaths. The AAMR decreased by 42%, from 55.4 in 1999 to 31.8 in 2020, with an associated APC of −2.6% (95% CI, −2.5% to −2.7%). From 1999 through 2011, the AAMR decreased, with an associated APC of −1.55% (95% CI, −1.4% to −1.7%). Following this initial decline, the AAMR decreased from 2011 through 2020 at a rate of −4.2% annually (95% CI, −3.8% to −4.6%) (Figure 1).

Figure 1.
Figure 1.

Trends in lung cancer AAMRs stratified by sex in the United States from 1999 through 2020.

Overall: 1999–2005 APC, −1.0%a (95% CI, −0.7% to −1.3%); 2005–2013 APC, −2.3%a (95% CI, −2.0% to −2.6%); 2013–2020 APC, −4.5%a (95% CI, −4.1% to −4.8%).

Female: 1999–2006 APC, −0.06% (95% CI, 0.3% to −0.5%); 2006–2014 APC, −2.0%a (95% CI, −1.7% to −2.2%); 2014–2020 APC, −4.2%a (95% CI, −3.9% to −4.6%).

Male: 1999–2005 APC, −1.9%a (95% CI, −1.6% to −2.2%); 2005–2013 APC, −2.9%a (95% CI, −2.7% to −3.2%); 2013–2020 APC, −5.0%a (95% CI, −4.8% to −5.2%).

Abbreviations: AAMR, age-adjusted mortality rate; APC, annual percent change.

aIndicates that the APC is significantly different from 0 at α=0.05.

Citation: Journal of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network 22, 6; 10.6004/jnccn.2024.7004

In 1999, men had an AAMR of 76.8, which was almost twice as high as women, who had an AAMR of 40.2. These differences became less pronounced over time, and in 2020, men had an AAMR of 38.1, whereas women had an AAMR of 26.9. The AAMR for men decreased at a rate of −2.38% (95% CI, −2.2% to −2.7%) annually from 1999 through 2011 compared with women, who experienced a decrease in mortality at a slower APC of −1.0% (95% CI, −1.0% to −1.2%) during the same period. Following the initial decline, a steeper decline in mortality was seen from 2012 through 2020, at a rate of −4.7% (95% CI, −4.5% to −4.9%) annually in men and −3.9% annually (95% CI, −3.9% to −4.3%) in women (Figure 1).

In 1999, non-Hispanic Black or African American individuals experienced the highest AAMR at 65.7, with an annual decrease of −3.0% (95% CI, −2.7% to −3.3%) to 33.4 in 2020, followed by non-Hispanic White individuals, who had an AAMR of 57.2 in 1999, with an annual decrease of −2.5% (95% CI, −2.1% to −2.8%) to 34.9 in 2020—the highest of any subgroup. Non-Hispanic American Indian or Alaska Native individuals experienced an AAMR of 39.9 in 1999, which decreased at an APC of −1.8% (95% CI, −1.2% to −2.4%) to 26.7 in 2020. Hispanic and non-Hispanic Asian or Pacific Islander individuals had similar AAMRs in 1999 of 25.0 and 27.9, respectively, which decreased to 14.1 and 18.5, respectively, in 2020 at rates of −2.7% (95% CI, −2.5% to −3.0%) and −2.0% (95% CI, −1.7% to −2.4%) (Figure 2).

Figure 2.
Figure 2.

Trends in lung cancer AAMRs stratified by race in the United States from 1999 through 2020.

Hispanic: 1999–2005 APC, −1.5%a (95% CI, −0.6% to −2.4%); 2005–2014 APC, −2.5%a (95% CI, −2.0% to −3.0%); 2014–2020 APC, −4.4%a (95% CI, −3.7% to −5.0%).

NH Black or African American: 1999–2004 APC, −1.6%a (95% CI, −1.1% to −2.2%); 2004–2013 APC, −2.5%a (95% CI, −2.3% to −2.8%); 2013–2020 APC, −5.0%a (95% CI, −4.7% to −5.4%).

NH White: 1999–2007 APC, −1.0%a (95% CI, −0.7% to −1.2%); 2007–2014 APC, −2.4%a (95% CI, −2.1% to −2.7%); 2014–2020 APC, −4.4%a (95% CI, −4.1% to −4.7%).

NH Asian or Pacific Islander: 1999–2013 APC, −1.1%a (95% CI, −0.9% to −1.4%); 2013–2018 APC, −4.3%a (95% CI, −3.0% to −5.5%); 2018–2020 APC, −2.4% (95% CI, −6.3% to 1.8%).

NH American Indian or Alaska Native: 1999–2004 APC, −2.0% (95% CI, −1.3% to 5.4%); 2004–2012 APC, −1.0% (95% CI, −2.7% to 0.7%); 2012–2020 APC, −4.2%a (95% CI, −3.0% to −5.5%).

Abbreviations: AAMR, age-adjusted mortality rate; APC, annual percent change; NH, non-Hispanic.

aIndicates that the APC is significantly different from 0 at α=0.05.

Citation: Journal of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network 22, 6; 10.6004/jnccn.2024.7004

From 1999 through 2020, people aged 25 to 44 years had the lowest AAMR, followed by those aged 45 to 64 years and those aged ≥65 years, respectively. In those aged 25 to 44 years, the AAMR was lowest, decreasing from 3.5 in 1999 to 1.1 in 2020. From 1999 to 2020, the average APC in young adults was the steepest of any subgroup at −6.2% (95% CI, −5.8% to −6.5%). From 1999 through 2002, this trend was largely stagnant, and then in 2002, the AAMR began to decrease at an APC of −6.6% (95% CI, −6.3% to −6.9%). In those aged 45 to 64 years, the AAMR slowly decreased from 67.4 in 1999 to 44.4 in 2014 at an APC of −2.9% (95% CI, −2.8% to −3.0%); subsequently, the AAMR decreased at a greater APC of −5.3% (95% CI, −4.9% to −5.6%) until 2020. Similar trends were seen for the oldest adults, aged ≥65 years. This group had the highest AAMR across all study years, decreasing from 311.8 in 1999 to 192.6 in 2020. There was a slow initial decline from 1999 to 2010 at an APC of −0.9% (95% CI, −0.7% to −1.2%), with a steeper decline from 2010 to 2020 at an APC of −3.9% (95% CI, −3.6% to −4.1%) (Figure 3).

Figure 3.
Figure 3.

Trends in lung cancer AAMRs stratified by age in the United States from 1999 through 2020.

Age 25–44 years: 1999–2002 APC, 0.1% (95% CI, −4.8% to 5.3%); 2002–2017 APC, −6.8%a (95% CI, −7.2% to −6.3%); 2017–2020 APC, −4.5% (95% CI, −9.2% to 0.4%).

Age 45–64 years: 1999–2001 APC, −1.8%a (95% CI, −3.5% to −0.2%); 2001–2014 APC, −2.9%a (95% CI, −3.0% to −2.8%); 2014–2020 APC, −5.2%a (95% CI, −5.5% to −4.9%).

Age ≥65 years: 1999–2005 APC, −0.3% (95% CI, −0.7% to 0.1%); 2005–2012 APC, −1.9%a (95% CI, −2.2% to −1.5%); 2012–2020 APC, −4.1%a (95% CI, −4.4% to −3.9%).

Abbreviations: AAMR, age-adjusted mortality rate; APC, annual percent change.

aIndicates that the APC is significantly different from 0 at α=0.05.

Citation: Journal of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network 22, 6; 10.6004/jnccn.2024.7004

Overall, rural populations had the greatest AAMR, followed by suburban and urban populations. From 1999 through 2020, rural populations experienced the highest AAMR, at 52.3, and the slowest rate of decrease, at an APC of −1.7% (95% CI, −1.4% to −2.0%). Urban populations experienced the lowest AAMR of 40.6 and fastest APC decrease of −3.1% (95% CI, −2.8% to −3.4%), whereas the AAMR of suburban populations was 45.5, with an associated APC decrease of −2.7% (95% CI, −2.4% to −3.0%) (Figure 4).

Figure 4.
Figure 4.

Trends in lung cancer AAMRs stratified by geographic densitya in the United States from 1999 through 2020.

Rural: 1999–2002 APC, 0.8% (95% CI, −0.5% to 2.2%); 2002–2012 APC, −1.1%b (95% CI, −1.4% to −0.9%); 2012–2020 APC, −3.4%b (95% CI, −3.7% to −3.1%).

Suburban: 1999–2005 APC, −0.8%b (95% CI, −1.2% to −0.5%); 2005–2014 APC, −2.6%b (−2.8% to −2.4%); 2014–2020 −4.6%b (95% CI, −4.9% to −4.3%).

Urban: 1999–2004 APC, −1.6%b (95% CI, −1.9% to −1.3%); 2004–2013 APC, −2.6%b (95% CI, −2.7% to −2.5%); 2013–2020 APC, −5.3%b (95% CI, −5.5% to −5.1%).

Abbreviations: AAMR, age-adjusted mortality rate; APC, annual percent change.

aBased on the 2013 US census classification.

bIndicates that the APC is significantly different from 0 at α=0.05.

Citation: Journal of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network 22, 6; 10.6004/jnccn.2024.7004

The AAMR from 1999 through 2020 varied widely by state, from 68.6 in Kentucky to 20.7 in Utah. States in the 90th percentile of mortality included Arkansas and Kentucky, whereas states in the 10th percentile of mortality included Hawaii and Utah. The AAMR from 1999 through 2020 was highest in the Midwest (55.7), followed by the South (54.5), Northeast (51.4), and West (37.0). The West experienced the fastest decrease at −3.1% annually (95% CI, −2.8% to −3.3%), whereas the Midwest experienced the slowest decrease at −2.0% annually (95% CI, −1.7% to −2.3%) (Figure 5).

Figure 5.
Figure 5.

State‐level lung cancer AAMRs in the United States from 1999 through 2020.

Abbreviation: AAMR, age-adjusted mortality rate.

Citation: Journal of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network 22, 6; 10.6004/jnccn.2024.7004

Discussion

In our nationwide study utilizing CDC death certificate data to describe lung cancer mortality in the United States from 1999 through 2020, we found many notable trends. First, after the initial decline in mortality from 1999 through 2011, there was a sharper decline from 2012 through 2020, at a rate of −4.2% each year. Throughout the study period, men had a higher AAMR than women, with a consistently steeper decline in mortality. Non-Hispanic Black or African American individuals experienced the highest AAMR related to lung cancer in 1999; however, these differences became less significant throughout the study period, and in 2020, non-Hispanic White individuals had a higher AAMR than non-Hispanic Black or African American individuals, with similar annual decreases of −3.0% and −2.5%, respectively. Lung cancer–related AAMR was highest in rural counties throughout the study period. Lung cancer mortality was highest in the Mid west and the South and lowest in the West.

The decline in mortality noted in our study may be explained by a decrease in lung cancer incidence.14 Several studies of national data have demonstrated trends by sex and geography, with varying results.6,15 A CDC incidence database study exploring trends in lung cancer incidence in metropolitan and nonmetropolitan counties from 2007 through 20166 showed that incidence rates declined in both county types during the study period, but the specific trends differed by sex and geography: men and those residing in nonmetropolitan counties had higher incidence rates. Furthermore, one study examined lung cancer incidence rates and trends by histologic subtype and geographic residence using the United States Cancer Statistics dataset, covering 100% of the US population, from 2004 through 2013.15 They found that incidence of squamous cell, small cell, and large cell carcinoma had decreased in both metropolitan and nonmetropolitan counties; however, adenocarcinoma incidence has been increasing in both county types. Additionally, incidence was higher in non-Hispanic Black individuals in rural counties than any other subgroup. Thus, the decrease in mortality demonstrated in our study may be explained in part due to a decrease in the incidence of lung cancer. These decreases in incidence may also explain why men experienced a steeper decline than women in lung cancer mortality from 2012 through 2020—men experienced greater decreases than women in incidence during this time period, which may reflect changes in smoking habits.16 Although clinicians are improving in their ability to detect lung cancer, these decreasing trends and incidence may be driven by a decrease in smoking rates during this time period.17,18

Additionally, the decrease in lung cancer mortality seen in our study is also explained by advances in treatment and survival. One study used the SEER database to assess lung cancer 2-year survival.19 It found that 2-year relative survival was higher among women than men and increased in each racial subgroup from 2001 through 2014. These changes may be driven by an evolving treatment paradigm, especially for NSCLC, which comprises roughly 75% of all lung cancer cases. The recent advancement of immune-based therapies targeting PD-1 and PD-L1 have led to an improvement in outcomes. Additionally, the identification of targetable oncogenes, such as EGFR and ALK, has led to the development of targeted therapies that have improved survival. Further studies are ongoing to address the cost-effectiveness of these targeted therapies as well as to determine strategies for early identification of patients who may derive benefit.20

Rural and urban differences in lung cancer incidence and mortality may also be explained by behavioral or environmental factors. A recent analysis demonstrated that mortality due to smoking has declined the fastest in large and coastal cities and the slowest in nonmetropolitan areas of the United States.18 Furthermore, another analysis of the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System showed that rural areas had the highest smoking rates of any subgroup, with increases in smoking noted in many states in the South.17 Another well-known risk factor for lung cancer is exposure to environmental factors, such as asbestos or radon. Previous studies have shown that rural areas are more likely to rely on well water or agricultural or mining industries, placing them at a higher risk of exposure to these environmental toxins.21 These same groups are also less likely to undergo home testing for radon, exposure to which would increase their lifetime risk of lung cancer.22 These environmental and behavioral factors may help to explain why the AAMR was highest in rural counties, especially those in the South. Additionally, baseline population health may explain the increased AAMR in the Midwest when compared with the West. Smoking prevalence is highest in the Midwest and South and lowest in the Northeast and West, which could explain differences in US census region mortality. Increasing formation of networks may serve to elevate screening access and participation among these at-risk populations.

In our study, we noted higher lung cancer–related mortality in non-Hispanic Black or African American and non-Hispanic White individuals when compared with Hispanic or non-Hispanic Asian or Pacific Islander populations. As mentioned previously, these differences may also be due to incidence: Hispanic populations had the lowest incidence of lung cancer in one study.15 Furthermore, likelihood of engaging in behavioral risk factors may differ between subgroups. For example, non-Hispanic Black or African American and non-Hispanic White individuals had the highest smoking rates, at 16.8% and 16.6%, respectively, whereas Hispanic and non-Hispanic Asian or Pacific Islander individuals had the lowest smoking rates, at 10.1% and 7.0%, respectively.23 Additionally, differences in screening rates may explain the increased risk that could drive a higher mortality in certain subgroups. There are currently no large, published studies assessing lung cancer screening rates in different racial groups. However, low quality of provider information regarding lung cancer screening has been proposed as a barrier to undergoing screening in non-Hispanic Black or African American individuals.24 Access to care is another barrier that may explain the higher mortality seen in non-Hispanic Black or African American persons: rural Black patients have reported more difficulty with access to cancer care when compared with White patients.25 In addition, several studies have shown that non-Hispanic Black or African American populations are less likely to receive guideline-concordant care, including slower times to treatment and a lower likelihood of being offered surgical resection.2628 These factors may contribute to the higher AAMR seen in non-Hispanic Black or African American individuals. However, the results of our study demonstrate that these disparities may be decreasing over time, with non-Hispanic Black or African American populations experiencing the highest rate of decline at −3.0% annually, which should encourage further positive change.

A number of strategies have been proposed to improve the disparities seen in lung cancer mortality in the United States. Increased use of lung cancer screening has been identified as one method to improve these disparities. However, the existing screening guidelines do not consider racial, ethnic, socioeconomic, and sex-based differences in smoking behaviors or lung cancer risk. This prompted the American Thoracic Society to release a statement describing strategies to improve screening rates in vulnerable populations, including the recommendation that specific health care institutions and organizations should propose quality metrics to address barriers and reduce disparities.29 Such metrics may lead to an increase in screening rates among vulnerable subgroups; however, an increased focus is needed in groups with increased mortality, such as men and rural populations. Fewer than 15% of eligible individuals actually undergo screening, which represents further potential for change. Furthermore, the American Thoracic Society promotes expanded research examining the use of mobile screening to improve access for rural or other at-risk populations to confront geographic barriers. Another strategy to improve these disparities may be to increase focus on patient navigation in order to provide assistance in overcoming barriers to care across the treatment continuum. One study examining the use of a multidisciplinary lung cancer care coordination program demonstrated reduced time to diagnosis and treatment.30 Finally, expansion of telehealth services has been proposed as another strategy to improve access to care among vulnerable groups. Although there are limited data regarding telehealth utilization in lung cancer, one study assessing telehealth for head and neck cancers showed these models of care to be statistically significantly less expensive and more cost-efficient than the standard model of care, with $642.30 in savings per patient.31 Thus, there is some feasibility that telehealth may have similar benefits for patients with lung cancer. Following the COVID-19 pandemic, telehealth platforms have expanded and have been found to be useful and effective across different populations.32 Of particular importance is their impact on disadvantaged patient populations, especially rural patients with geographic barriers to care.32,33

With regard to socioeconomic disparities, our findings tell a positive story in parts of the data. Since 2014, lung cancer mortality rates in non-Hispanic Black or African American and non-Hispanic White populations have been essentially the same, narrowing the mortality gap seen in 1999. These results may be explained by the intersection of a variety of social determinants of health—it is too simple to suggest that race alone is responsible for differences in mortality. One meta-analysis including 131,378 non-Hispanic Black patients found no significant difference in survival when comparing Black and White patients.34 Several studies have been published accounting for other socioeconomic differences between these 2 groups. One study found a decreased risk of mortality after surgery in Black patients,35 whereas another found increased overall survival in Black patients with stage III NSCLC,36 providing potential explanations for the narrowing mortality gap seen over time between these 2 groups. However, the interaction between social determinants of health is complex and multifaceted. This is supported by the fact that the degree of disparity of lung cancer incidence increases with increasing rurality of residence in all racial subgroups, suggesting that disparities in mortality may be similarly driven.15 Furthermore, living in rural areas increased the risk of death in Black patients by 54%.37 Thus, heterogeneity related to geographic and residential environment may be vitally important drivers of lung cancer mortality.

Our study is not without limitations. One key limitation is that the CDC WONDER database uses data collected from death certificates, which may inflate the nationwide mortality estimates.19 This is because occult lung cancer cases identified upon death will be counted in the mortality estimates. Despite this, we opted to query the CDC database because it contains geographic data not accounted for in any other national database. Another limitation of this study is that the CDC database strictly reports data from death certificates and does not contain data regarding histologic subtype, time to treatment, treatments received, or other important predictors of mortality, such as comorbid conditions or disease stage. Additionally, because the database reports the state in which death occurred, it is possible that deaths may be misclassified from the state that the individual resided in, which may impact geographic trends. Lastly, it is possible that the database may have misclassified the cause of death on the death certificates reported. However, the CDC WONDER database is a comprehensive source of data that has been widely used in studies assessing cancer and other causes of mortality and undergoes internal validation and quality assurance measures.9,10,38

Conclusions

Our study demonstrates a significant improvement in lung cancer mortality in the United States from 1999 through 2020. However, although the mortality rate of lung cancer has been decreasing since 1999, not all demographic groups have experienced the same rates of decline, and disparities in outcomes remain prevalent. These disparities are particularly prevalent among non-Hispanic Black or African American individuals and those residing in rural counties. Vulnerable subgroups may benefit from targeted interventions, such as increased utilization of telehealth platforms, academic center outreach and affiliation with community care centers, screening CT scans, and patient navigation while undergoing cancer care.

References

  • 1.

    National Cancer Institute. Cancer stat facts: lung and bronchus cancer. Accessed December 30, 2023. Available at: https://seer.cancer.gov/statfacts/html/lungb.html

    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 2.

    Travis WD, Brambilla E, Burke AP, et al. Introduction to the 2015 World Health Organization classification of tumors of the lung, pleura, thymus, and heart. J Thorac Oncol 2015;10:12401242.

    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 3.

    Travis WD, Lubin J, Ries L, et al. United States lung carcinoma incidence trends: declining for most histologic types among males, increasing among females. Cancer 1996;77:24642470.

    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 4.

    Lewis DR, Check DP, Caporaso NE, et al. US lung cancer trends by histologic type. Cancer 2014;120:28832892.

  • 5.

    Field RW, Withers BL. Occupational and environmental causes of lung cancer. Clin Chest Med 2012;33:681703.

  • 6.

    O’Neil ME, Henley SJ, Rohan EA, et al. Lung cancer incidence in nonmetropolitan and metropolitan counties - United States, 2007–2016. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep 2019;68:993998.

    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 7.

    Tataru D, Spencer K, Bates A, et al. Variation in geographical treatment intensity affects survival of non-small cell lung cancer patients in England. Cancer Epidemiol 2018;57:1323.

    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 8.

    Sahar L, Douangchai Wills VL, Liu K, et al. Geographic access to lung cancer screening among eligible adults living in rural and urban environments in the United States. Cancer 2022;128:15841594.

    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 9.

    Jani C, Mouchati C, Abdallah N, et al. Trends in prostate cancer mortality in the United States of America, by state and race, from 1999 to 2019: estimates from the centers for disease control WONDER database. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis 2023;26:552562.

    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 10.

    Kaur M, Joshu CE, Visvanathan K, et al. Trends in breast cancer incidence rates by race/ethnicity: patterns by stage, socioeconomic position, and geography in the United States, 1999–2017. Cancer 2022;128:10151023.

    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 11.

    Ingram DD, Franco SJ. 2013 NCHS urban-rural classification scheme for counties. Accessed December 1, 2023. Available at: https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/series/sr_02/sr02_166.pdf

    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 12.

    Anderson RN, Rosenberg HM. Age standardization of death rates: implementation of the year 2000 standard. Natl Vital Stat Rep 1998;47:116; 20.

  • 13.

    Kim HJ, Fay MP, Feuer EJ, et al. Permutation tests for joinpoint regression with applications to cancer rates. Stat Med 2000;19:335351.

  • 14.

    CDC. Lung cancer statistics. Accessed May 10, 2023. Available at: https://www.cdc.gov/cancer/lung/statistics/index.htm

  • 15.

    Houston KA, Mitchell KA, King J, et al. Histologic lung cancer incidence rates and trends vary by race/ethnicity and residential county. J Thorac Oncol 2018;13:497509.

    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 16.

    Henley SJ, Richards TB, Underwood JM, et al. Lung cancer incidence trends among men and women--United States, 2005–2009. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep 2014;63:15.

  • 17.

    Doescher MP, Jackson JE, Jerant A, et al. Prevalence and trends in smoking: a national rural study. J Rural Health 2006;22:112118.

  • 18.

    Hendi AS, Ho JY. Smoking and the widening inequality in life expectancy between metropolitan and nonmetropolitan areas of the United States. Front Public Health 2022;10:942842.

    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 19.

    Howlader N, Forjaz G, Mooradian MJ, et al. The effect of advances in lung-cancer treatment on population mortality. N Engl J Med 2020;383:640649.

  • 20.

    Blom EF, ten Haaf K, Arenberg DA, et al. Disparities in receiving guideline-concordant treatment for lung cancer in the United States. Ann Am Thorac Soc 2020;17:186194.

    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 21.

    Strosnider H, Kennedy C, Monti M, et al. Rural and urban differences in air quality, 2008–2012, and community drinking water quality, 2010–2015 - United States. MMWR Surveill Summ 2017;66:110.

    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 22.

    Zahnd WE, Mueller-Luckey GS, Ratnapradipa K, et al. Predictors and spatial variation of radon testing in Illinois, 2005–2012. J Public Health Manag Pract 2018;24:e19.

    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 23.

    American Lung Association Tobacco use in racial and ethnic populations. Accessed May 10, 2023. Available at: https://www.lung.org/quit-smoking/smoking-facts/impact-of-tobacco-use/tobacco-use-racial-and-ethnic

    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 24.

    Katz ML, James AS, Pignone MP, et al. Colorectal cancer screening among African American church members: a qualitative and quantitative study of patient-provider communication. BMC Public Health 2004;4:62.

    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 25.

    Mollica MA, Weaver KE, McNeel TS, et al. Examining urban and rural differences in perceived timeliness of care among cancer patients: a SEER-CAHPS study. Cancer 2018;124:32573265.

    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 26.

    Shugarman LR, Mack K, Sorbero ME, et al. Race and sex differences in the receipt of timely and appropriate lung cancer treatment. Med Care 2009;47:774781.

  • 27.

    Rapp JL, Tuminello S, Alpert N, et al. Disparities in surgical recommendation for stage I non-small cell lung cancer. Am J Clin Oncol 2020;43:741747.

  • 28.

    Steele CB, Pisu M, Richardson LC. Urban/rural patterns in receipt of treatment for non-small cell lung cancer among black and white Medicare beneficiaries, 2000–2003. J Natl Med Assoc 2011;103:711718.

    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 29.

    Rivera MP, Katki HA, Tanner NT, et al. Addressing disparities in lung cancer screening eligibility and healthcare access. An official American Thoracic Society statement. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2020;202:e95112.

    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 30.

    Alsamarai S, Yao X, Cain HC, et al. The effect of a lung cancer care coordination program on timeliness of care. Clin Lung Cancer 2013;14:527534.

  • 31.

    De Ravin E, Armache M, Campbell F, et al. Feasibility and cost of telehealth head and neck cancer survivorship care: a systematic review. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2023;168:13121323.

    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 32.

    Hirko KA, Kerver JM, Ford S, et al. Telehealth in response to the COVID-19 pandemic: implications for rural health disparities. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2020;27:18161818.

    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 33.

    Kichloo A, Albosta M, Dettloff K, et al. Telemedicine, the current COVID-19 pandemic and the future: a narrative review and perspectives moving forward in the USA. Fam Med Community Health 2020;8:e000530.

    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 34.

    Klugman M, Xue X, Hosgood HD 3rd. Race/ethnicity and lung cancer survival in the United States: a meta-analysis. Cancer Causes Control 2019;30:12311241.

  • 35.

    LaPar DJ, Bhamidipati CM, Harris DA, et al. Gender, race, and socioeconomic status affects outcomes after lung cancer resections in the United States. Ann Thorac Surg 2011;92:434439.

    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 36.

    Vyfhuis MAL, Bentzen SM, Molitoris JK, et al. Patterns of care and survival in stage III NSCLC among Black and Latino patients compared with White patients. Clin Lung Cancer 2019;20:248257.e4.

    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 37.

    Johnson AM, Johnson A, Hines RB, et al. Neighborhood context and non-small cell lung cancer outcomes in Florida non-elderly patients by race/ethnicity. Lung Cancer 2020;142:2027.

    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 38.

    Ariss RW, Minhas AMK, Lang J, et al. Demographic and regional trends in stroke-related mortality in young adults in the United States, 1999 to 2019. J Am Heart Assoc 2022;11:e025903.

    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

Submitted June 25, 2023; final revision received January 5, 2024; accepted for publication January 8, 2024. Published online June 4, 2024.

Author contributions: Conceptualization: Didier. Supervision: Roof, Stevenson. Writing—original draft: All authors. Writing—review & editing: All authors.

Disclosures: Dr. Stevenson has disclosed serving as a principal investigator for Merck & Co., Inc., Black Diamond Therapeutics, and Alpha Oncology; and serving as a scientific advisor for Arcus Biosciences. The remaining authors have disclosed that they have not received any financial consideration from any person or organization to support the preparation, analysis, results, or discussion of this article.

Correspondence: Alexander J. Didier, BS, The University of Toledo College of Medicine and Life Sciences, 3000 Arlington Avenue, Toledo, OH 43606. Email: adidier@rockets.utoledo.edu
  • Collapse
  • Expand
  • Figure 1.

    Trends in lung cancer AAMRs stratified by sex in the United States from 1999 through 2020.

    Overall: 1999–2005 APC, −1.0%a (95% CI, −0.7% to −1.3%); 2005–2013 APC, −2.3%a (95% CI, −2.0% to −2.6%); 2013–2020 APC, −4.5%a (95% CI, −4.1% to −4.8%).

    Female: 1999–2006 APC, −0.06% (95% CI, 0.3% to −0.5%); 2006–2014 APC, −2.0%a (95% CI, −1.7% to −2.2%); 2014–2020 APC, −4.2%a (95% CI, −3.9% to −4.6%).

    Male: 1999–2005 APC, −1.9%a (95% CI, −1.6% to −2.2%); 2005–2013 APC, −2.9%a (95% CI, −2.7% to −3.2%); 2013–2020 APC, −5.0%a (95% CI, −4.8% to −5.2%).

    Abbreviations: AAMR, age-adjusted mortality rate; APC, annual percent change.

    aIndicates that the APC is significantly different from 0 at α=0.05.

  • Figure 2.

    Trends in lung cancer AAMRs stratified by race in the United States from 1999 through 2020.

    Hispanic: 1999–2005 APC, −1.5%a (95% CI, −0.6% to −2.4%); 2005–2014 APC, −2.5%a (95% CI, −2.0% to −3.0%); 2014–2020 APC, −4.4%a (95% CI, −3.7% to −5.0%).

    NH Black or African American: 1999–2004 APC, −1.6%a (95% CI, −1.1% to −2.2%); 2004–2013 APC, −2.5%a (95% CI, −2.3% to −2.8%); 2013–2020 APC, −5.0%a (95% CI, −4.7% to −5.4%).

    NH White: 1999–2007 APC, −1.0%a (95% CI, −0.7% to −1.2%); 2007–2014 APC, −2.4%a (95% CI, −2.1% to −2.7%); 2014–2020 APC, −4.4%a (95% CI, −4.1% to −4.7%).

    NH Asian or Pacific Islander: 1999–2013 APC, −1.1%a (95% CI, −0.9% to −1.4%); 2013–2018 APC, −4.3%a (95% CI, −3.0% to −5.5%); 2018–2020 APC, −2.4% (95% CI, −6.3% to 1.8%).

    NH American Indian or Alaska Native: 1999–2004 APC, −2.0% (95% CI, −1.3% to 5.4%); 2004–2012 APC, −1.0% (95% CI, −2.7% to 0.7%); 2012–2020 APC, −4.2%a (95% CI, −3.0% to −5.5%).

    Abbreviations: AAMR, age-adjusted mortality rate; APC, annual percent change; NH, non-Hispanic.

    aIndicates that the APC is significantly different from 0 at α=0.05.

  • Figure 3.

    Trends in lung cancer AAMRs stratified by age in the United States from 1999 through 2020.

    Age 25–44 years: 1999–2002 APC, 0.1% (95% CI, −4.8% to 5.3%); 2002–2017 APC, −6.8%a (95% CI, −7.2% to −6.3%); 2017–2020 APC, −4.5% (95% CI, −9.2% to 0.4%).

    Age 45–64 years: 1999–2001 APC, −1.8%a (95% CI, −3.5% to −0.2%); 2001–2014 APC, −2.9%a (95% CI, −3.0% to −2.8%); 2014–2020 APC, −5.2%a (95% CI, −5.5% to −4.9%).

    Age ≥65 years: 1999–2005 APC, −0.3% (95% CI, −0.7% to 0.1%); 2005–2012 APC, −1.9%a (95% CI, −2.2% to −1.5%); 2012–2020 APC, −4.1%a (95% CI, −4.4% to −3.9%).

    Abbreviations: AAMR, age-adjusted mortality rate; APC, annual percent change.

    aIndicates that the APC is significantly different from 0 at α=0.05.

  • Figure 4.

    Trends in lung cancer AAMRs stratified by geographic densitya in the United States from 1999 through 2020.

    Rural: 1999–2002 APC, 0.8% (95% CI, −0.5% to 2.2%); 2002–2012 APC, −1.1%b (95% CI, −1.4% to −0.9%); 2012–2020 APC, −3.4%b (95% CI, −3.7% to −3.1%).

    Suburban: 1999–2005 APC, −0.8%b (95% CI, −1.2% to −0.5%); 2005–2014 APC, −2.6%b (−2.8% to −2.4%); 2014–2020 −4.6%b (95% CI, −4.9% to −4.3%).

    Urban: 1999–2004 APC, −1.6%b (95% CI, −1.9% to −1.3%); 2004–2013 APC, −2.6%b (95% CI, −2.7% to −2.5%); 2013–2020 APC, −5.3%b (95% CI, −5.5% to −5.1%).

    Abbreviations: AAMR, age-adjusted mortality rate; APC, annual percent change.

    aBased on the 2013 US census classification.

    bIndicates that the APC is significantly different from 0 at α=0.05.

  • Figure 5.

    State‐level lung cancer AAMRs in the United States from 1999 through 2020.

    Abbreviation: AAMR, age-adjusted mortality rate.

  • 1.

    National Cancer Institute. Cancer stat facts: lung and bronchus cancer. Accessed December 30, 2023. Available at: https://seer.cancer.gov/statfacts/html/lungb.html

    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 2.

    Travis WD, Brambilla E, Burke AP, et al. Introduction to the 2015 World Health Organization classification of tumors of the lung, pleura, thymus, and heart. J Thorac Oncol 2015;10:12401242.

    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 3.

    Travis WD, Lubin J, Ries L, et al. United States lung carcinoma incidence trends: declining for most histologic types among males, increasing among females. Cancer 1996;77:24642470.

    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 4.

    Lewis DR, Check DP, Caporaso NE, et al. US lung cancer trends by histologic type. Cancer 2014;120:28832892.

  • 5.

    Field RW, Withers BL. Occupational and environmental causes of lung cancer. Clin Chest Med 2012;33:681703.

  • 6.

    O’Neil ME, Henley SJ, Rohan EA, et al. Lung cancer incidence in nonmetropolitan and metropolitan counties - United States, 2007–2016. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep 2019;68:993998.

    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 7.

    Tataru D, Spencer K, Bates A, et al. Variation in geographical treatment intensity affects survival of non-small cell lung cancer patients in England. Cancer Epidemiol 2018;57:1323.

    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 8.

    Sahar L, Douangchai Wills VL, Liu K, et al. Geographic access to lung cancer screening among eligible adults living in rural and urban environments in the United States. Cancer 2022;128:15841594.

    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 9.

    Jani C, Mouchati C, Abdallah N, et al. Trends in prostate cancer mortality in the United States of America, by state and race, from 1999 to 2019: estimates from the centers for disease control WONDER database. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis 2023;26:552562.

    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 10.

    Kaur M, Joshu CE, Visvanathan K, et al. Trends in breast cancer incidence rates by race/ethnicity: patterns by stage, socioeconomic position, and geography in the United States, 1999–2017. Cancer 2022;128:10151023.

    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 11.

    Ingram DD, Franco SJ. 2013 NCHS urban-rural classification scheme for counties. Accessed December 1, 2023. Available at: https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/series/sr_02/sr02_166.pdf

    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 12.

    Anderson RN, Rosenberg HM. Age standardization of death rates: implementation of the year 2000 standard. Natl Vital Stat Rep 1998;47:116; 20.

  • 13.

    Kim HJ, Fay MP, Feuer EJ, et al. Permutation tests for joinpoint regression with applications to cancer rates. Stat Med 2000;19:335351.

  • 14.

    CDC. Lung cancer statistics. Accessed May 10, 2023. Available at: https://www.cdc.gov/cancer/lung/statistics/index.htm

  • 15.

    Houston KA, Mitchell KA, King J, et al. Histologic lung cancer incidence rates and trends vary by race/ethnicity and residential county. J Thorac Oncol 2018;13:497509.

    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 16.

    Henley SJ, Richards TB, Underwood JM, et al. Lung cancer incidence trends among men and women--United States, 2005–2009. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep 2014;63:15.

  • 17.

    Doescher MP, Jackson JE, Jerant A, et al. Prevalence and trends in smoking: a national rural study. J Rural Health 2006;22:112118.

  • 18.

    Hendi AS, Ho JY. Smoking and the widening inequality in life expectancy between metropolitan and nonmetropolitan areas of the United States. Front Public Health 2022;10:942842.

    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 19.

    Howlader N, Forjaz G, Mooradian MJ, et al. The effect of advances in lung-cancer treatment on population mortality. N Engl J Med 2020;383:640649.

  • 20.

    Blom EF, ten Haaf K, Arenberg DA, et al. Disparities in receiving guideline-concordant treatment for lung cancer in the United States. Ann Am Thorac Soc 2020;17:186194.

    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 21.

    Strosnider H, Kennedy C, Monti M, et al. Rural and urban differences in air quality, 2008–2012, and community drinking water quality, 2010–2015 - United States. MMWR Surveill Summ 2017;66:110.

    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 22.

    Zahnd WE, Mueller-Luckey GS, Ratnapradipa K, et al. Predictors and spatial variation of radon testing in Illinois, 2005–2012. J Public Health Manag Pract 2018;24:e19.

    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 23.

    American Lung Association Tobacco use in racial and ethnic populations. Accessed May 10, 2023. Available at: https://www.lung.org/quit-smoking/smoking-facts/impact-of-tobacco-use/tobacco-use-racial-and-ethnic

    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 24.

    Katz ML, James AS, Pignone MP, et al. Colorectal cancer screening among African American church members: a qualitative and quantitative study of patient-provider communication. BMC Public Health 2004;4:62.

    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 25.

    Mollica MA, Weaver KE, McNeel TS, et al. Examining urban and rural differences in perceived timeliness of care among cancer patients: a SEER-CAHPS study. Cancer 2018;124:32573265.

    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 26.

    Shugarman LR, Mack K, Sorbero ME, et al. Race and sex differences in the receipt of timely and appropriate lung cancer treatment. Med Care 2009;47:774781.

  • 27.

    Rapp JL, Tuminello S, Alpert N, et al. Disparities in surgical recommendation for stage I non-small cell lung cancer. Am J Clin Oncol 2020;43:741747.

  • 28.

    Steele CB, Pisu M, Richardson LC. Urban/rural patterns in receipt of treatment for non-small cell lung cancer among black and white Medicare beneficiaries, 2000–2003. J Natl Med Assoc 2011;103:711718.

    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 29.

    Rivera MP, Katki HA, Tanner NT, et al. Addressing disparities in lung cancer screening eligibility and healthcare access. An official American Thoracic Society statement. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2020;202:e95112.

    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 30.

    Alsamarai S, Yao X, Cain HC, et al. The effect of a lung cancer care coordination program on timeliness of care. Clin Lung Cancer 2013;14:527534.

  • 31.

    De Ravin E, Armache M, Campbell F, et al. Feasibility and cost of telehealth head and neck cancer survivorship care: a systematic review. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2023;168:13121323.

    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 32.

    Hirko KA, Kerver JM, Ford S, et al. Telehealth in response to the COVID-19 pandemic: implications for rural health disparities. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2020;27:18161818.

    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 33.

    Kichloo A, Albosta M, Dettloff K, et al. Telemedicine, the current COVID-19 pandemic and the future: a narrative review and perspectives moving forward in the USA. Fam Med Community Health 2020;8:e000530.

    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 34.

    Klugman M, Xue X, Hosgood HD 3rd. Race/ethnicity and lung cancer survival in the United States: a meta-analysis. Cancer Causes Control 2019;30:12311241.

  • 35.

    LaPar DJ, Bhamidipati CM, Harris DA, et al. Gender, race, and socioeconomic status affects outcomes after lung cancer resections in the United States. Ann Thorac Surg 2011;92:434439.

    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 36.

    Vyfhuis MAL, Bentzen SM, Molitoris JK, et al. Patterns of care and survival in stage III NSCLC among Black and Latino patients compared with White patients. Clin Lung Cancer 2019;20:248257.e4.

    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 37.

    Johnson AM, Johnson A, Hines RB, et al. Neighborhood context and non-small cell lung cancer outcomes in Florida non-elderly patients by race/ethnicity. Lung Cancer 2020;142:2027.

    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 38.

    Ariss RW, Minhas AMK, Lang J, et al. Demographic and regional trends in stroke-related mortality in young adults in the United States, 1999 to 2019. J Am Heart Assoc 2022;11:e025903.

    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

Metrics

All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 0 0 0
Full Text Views 963 963 385
PDF Downloads 556 556 198
EPUB Downloads 0 0 0