Disparities in glioblastoma care: Insights from a nationwide survey.

11112 Background: Glioblastoma (GBM) care requires specialized, multidisciplinary management, often creating barriers to healthcare delivery and disparities in care. To identify disparities in how GBM is treated across the United States, we conducted a nationwide survey evaluating healthcare quality and accessibility for GBM patients. Methods: OurBrainBank, a patient-led GBM nonprofit, designed and distributed a 36-item HIPAA-compliant survey covering patient experience, quality of life, and demographic data in collaboration with a professional market research company. The survey, available from February to September 2024, targeted current GBM patients, current caregivers, or caregivers who have lost someone within the last year. Recruitment involved newsletters, social media, and communication partnerships with brain cancer organizations. We hypothesized that financial and educational disparities would influence GBM care experiences, assessed through logistic and linear regression using R (version 4.0.5). Only patients with non-missing data were included for each regression analysis. Results: Of 525 participants overall (77% caregivers; 23% patients), the median age at diagnosis was 59, with 58% being male, 55% with a college degree, 66% with private insurance and 94% living in urban areas. Education and financial difficulties were associated with disparate GBM care experiences, controlling for age, race, gender, geography (rural, small town, urban), and insurance type (private, public). Participants with no college education (21%) were significantly less likely to be informed about tissue storage (OR = 0.40, 95% CI [0.21, 0.75], p = .004), to undergo MGMT and IDH testing (OR = 0.28, 95% CI [0.11, 0.68], p = .005), to be offered a clinical trial (OR = 0.50, 95% CI [0.29, 0.86], p = .013), and to discuss a second opinion with their doctor (OR = 0.44, 95% CI [0.26, 0.73], p = .002) compared to those with a college degree (55%). They also reported lower satisfaction with care on a 1-10 scale (β = -0.70; 95% CI [-1.26, -0.13], p = .016). These disparities were not observed in participants with some college experience (24%) compared to those with college degrees. Participants reporting financial difficulty in the past year (29%) were also less satisfied with their care (β = -0.58, 95% CI [-1.06, -0.10], p = .018). Financial struggles, however, did not significantly impact mutational testing (OR = 0.57, 95% CI [0.28, 1.18], p = .12), clinical trial offers (OR = 1.25, 95% CI [0.81, 1.92], p = .31), or second opinion discussions (OR = 0.94, 95% CI [0.62, 1.44], p = .79). Conclusions: This survey highlights disparities in GBM care, with lower educational attainment linked to reduced access to mutational testing, second opinion discussions and clinical trials, and both lower education and financial difficulties associated with lower care satisfaction. Addressing these disparities is critical to improving GBM care nationwide.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Clinical Oncology
Published
2025-05-28
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.2025.43.16_suppl.11112
Primary Topic
Advances in Oncology and Radiotherapy
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Disparities in glioblastoma care: Insights from a nationwide survey.

Quinn T. Ostrom, Lakshmi Nayak, David Robles, Jacob Ellen et al.
Journal of Clinical Oncology
Advances in Oncology and Radiotherapy
article

Disparities in glioblastoma care: Insights from a nationwide survey.

Quinn T. Ostrom, Lakshmi Nayak, David Robles, Jacob Ellen, Kelli Duprey, Ed Pilkington, FABIO MASSAITI IWAMOTO
article en

Abstract

11112 Background: Glioblastoma (GBM) care requires specialized, multidisciplinary management, often creating barriers to healthcare delivery and disparities in care. To identify disparities in how GBM is treated across the United States, we conducted a nationwide survey evaluating healthcare quality and accessibility for GBM patients. Methods: OurBrainBank, a patient-led GBM nonprofit, designed and distributed a 36-item HIPAA-compliant survey covering patient experience, quality of life, and demographic data in collaboration with a professional market research company. The survey, available from February to September 2024, targeted current GBM patients, current caregivers, or caregivers who have lost someone within the last year. Recruitment involved newsletters, social media, and communication partnerships with brain cancer organizations. We hypothesized that financial and educational disparities would influence GBM care experiences, assessed through logistic and linear regression using R (version 4.0.5). Only patients with non-missing data were included for each regression analysis. Results: Of 525 participants overall (77% caregivers; 23% patients), the median age at diagnosis was 59, with 58% being male, 55% with a college degree, 66% with private insurance and 94% living in urban areas. Education and financial difficulties were associated with disparate GBM care experiences, controlling for age, race, gender, geography (rural, small town, urban), and insurance type (private, public). Participants with no college education (21%) were significantly less likely to be informed about tissue storage (OR = 0.40, 95% CI [0.21, 0.75], p = .004), to undergo MGMT and IDH testing (OR = 0.28, 95% CI [0.11, 0.68], p = .005), to be offered a clinical trial (OR = 0.50, 95% CI [0.29, 0.86], p = .013), and to discuss a second opinion with their doctor (OR = 0.44, 95% CI [0.26, 0.73], p = .002) compared to those with a college degree (55%). They also reported lower satisfaction with care on a 1-10 scale (β = -0.70; 95% CI [-1.26, -0.13], p = .016). These disparities were not observed in participants with some college experience (24%) compared to those with college degrees. Participants reporting financial difficulty in the past year (29%) were also less satisfied with their care (β = -0.58, 95% CI [-1.06, -0.10], p = .018). Financial struggles, however, did not significantly impact mutational testing (OR = 0.57, 95% CI [0.28, 1.18], p = .12), clinical trial offers (OR = 1.25, 95% CI [0.81, 1.92], p = .31), or second opinion discussions (OR = 0.94, 95% CI [0.62, 1.44], p = .79). Conclusions: This survey highlights disparities in GBM care, with lower educational attainment linked to reduced access to mutational testing, second opinion discussions and clinical trials, and both lower education and financial difficulties associated with lower care satisfaction. Addressing these disparities is critical to improving GBM care nationwide.

Journal of Clinical OncologyVol. 43(16_suppl)
Harvard University (US), Duke University (US), Columbia University Irving Medical Center (US), Dana-Farber Cancer Institute (US)
Openalex Percentile: Top 82%
Advances in Oncology and Radiotherapy
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.