Cancer outcomes, screening rates, and health behaviors by county-level poverty status.

R Rishi Gattu (The University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center, Oklahoma City, OK) L Lauren Launhardt (The University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center, Oklahoma City, OK) J Janis Campbell (University of Oklahoma, Oklahoma City, OK) G Gaurav Kumar (Stanford PULSE Institute, SLAC National Accelerator Laboratory) J Jordan Neil (University of Oklahoma Health Campus, Oklahoma City, OK) K Katie Keyser (Stephenson Cancer Center, The University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center, Oklahoma City, OK) R Reema Moussa (The University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center, Oklahoma City, OK) M Matthew Nguyen (1Montefiore Einstein, Bronx, United States) A Ariana Ahmadi (The University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center, Oklahoma City, OK) S Sadie Maltz (The University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center, Oklahoma City, OK) S Sara Vesely (24University of Oklahoma Health Sciences, Oklahoma city, United States) M Mark Philip Doescher (University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center, Oklahoma City, OK) D Darla Kendzor (TSET Health Promotion Research Center, University of Oklahoma Health Campus, Oklahoma City, OK) N Nirmal Choradia (Stephenson Cancer Center, The University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center, Oklahoma City, OK) R Ryan David Nipp (Stephenson Cancer Center, The University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center, Oklahoma City, OK)

Abstract

e23128 Background: Persistent poverty is associated with enduring structural barriers to cancer prevention and care, a challenge further magnified in predominantly rural states in which access constraints place communities at risk for lower screening uptake and more advanced cancer diagnosis. However, little is known about differences in cancer-related health behaviors, screening rates, and outcomes by county-level poverty status. Thus, we sought to compare health behaviors, screening rates, and cancer outcomes by county-level poverty status in a rural state (Oklahoma). Methods: We classified Oklahoma counties as persistent poverty counties (PPCs), defined as having ≥20% of residents living in poverty for ≥30 years, based on the U.S. Economic Development Administration criteria (2022; 18 counties). We categorized current poverty counties (CPCs) as those with ≥20% of residents living in poverty in 2022 but not meeting PPC criteria, based on the Small Area Income and Poverty Estimates (2022; 24 counties). We categorized remaining counties as non-poverty counties (NPCs), with <20% of residents living in poverty (35 counties). We obtained county-level sociodemographic characteristics and health behaviors from the University of Wisconsin Population Health Institute County Health Rankings (2022). We gathered breast and colorectal cancer screening rates (2022) from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention PLACES data repository. We obtained age-adjusted incidence and mortality rates from OK2Share for lung, breast, and colorectal cancers (2018–2022). We evaluated group differences across PPCs, CPCs, and NPCs using one way analysis of variance. Results: Among Oklahoma counties, average county rurality (85.9% [PPCs] vs 76.0% [CPCs] vs 62.2% [NPCs]; p=.011) differed significantly by county poverty status. Health behaviors also differed across county groups, with higher rates of smoking in PPCs (22.6% vs 19.9% [CPCs] vs 18.0% [NPCs]; p<.001) and physical inactivity (35.1% vs 32.8% [CPCs] vs 30.4% [NPCs]; p<.001). Cancer screening rates were lower in PPCs for colorectal cancer (50.9% vs 52.8% [CPCs] vs 54.3% [NPCs]; p<.001) and breast cancer (64.5% vs 66.9% [CPCs] vs 68.1% [NPCs]; p<.001). Notably, lung cancer incidence and age-adjusted mortality rates were highest in PPCs (incidence: 77.5 vs 70.0 [CPCs] vs 60.9 [NPCs] per 100,000; p=.001; mortality: 54.6 vs 50.7 [CPCs] vs 44.5 [NPCs] per 100,000; p=.003), while breast and colorectal cancer incidence and mortality did not differ significantly across county groups. Conclusions: At the county level in a largely rural state, PPCs had higher rates of smoking and physical inactivity, lower rates of cancer screening, and higher lung cancer incidence and mortality than CPCs and NPCs. Findings highlight the need for targeted strategies to enhance cancer prevention and optimize oncologic care delivery for individuals living in areas with persistent poverty.

Article Details

Volume / Issue Vol. 44, Issue 16_suppl
Published June 01, 2026
ISSN 0732-183X
Publisher Lippincott Williams & Wilkins

Journal Info

Journal of Clinical Oncology

Lippincott Williams & Wilkins

ISSN: 0732-183X Health Sciences

Authors (15)

R

Rishi Gattu

The University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center, Oklahoma City, OK

L

Lauren Launhardt

The University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center, Oklahoma City, OK

J

Janis Campbell

University of Oklahoma, Oklahoma City, OK

G

Gaurav Kumar

Stanford PULSE Institute, SLAC National Accelerator Laboratory

J

Jordan Neil

University of Oklahoma Health Campus, Oklahoma City, OK

K

Katie Keyser

Stephenson Cancer Center, The University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center, Oklahoma City, OK

R

Reema Moussa

The University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center, Oklahoma City, OK

M

Matthew Nguyen

1Montefiore Einstein, Bronx, United States

A

Ariana Ahmadi

The University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center, Oklahoma City, OK

S

Sadie Maltz

The University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center, Oklahoma City, OK

S

Sara Vesely

24University of Oklahoma Health Sciences, Oklahoma city, United States

M

Mark Philip Doescher

University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center, Oklahoma City, OK

D

Darla Kendzor

TSET Health Promotion Research Center, University of Oklahoma Health Campus, Oklahoma City, OK

N

Nirmal Choradia

Stephenson Cancer Center, The University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center, Oklahoma City, OK

R

Ryan David Nipp

Stephenson Cancer Center, The University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center, Oklahoma City, OK