Association of Historical Redlining and Present-Day Social Vulnerability with Cancer Screening
- PMID: 37318132
- DOI: 10.1097/XCS.0000000000000779
Association of Historical Redlining and Present-Day Social Vulnerability with Cancer Screening
Abstract
Background: The Healthy People 2030 initiative has set national cancer screening targets at 77.1%, 74.4%, and 84.3% for breast, colon, and cervical cancers, respectively. We sought to assess the association between historical redlining relative and present-day social vulnerability on screening targets for breast, colon, and cervical cancer.
Study design: Data on national census-tract level cancer screening prevalence and social vulnerability index in 2020 was extracted from the CDC PLACES and CDC social vulnerability index databases, respectively. Census tracts were then assigned Home-Owners Loan Corporation grades (A: "Best", B: "Still Desirable", C: "Definitely Declining," and D: "Hazardous/Redlined"). Mixed-effects logistic regression and mediation analyses were conducted to evaluate the association between Home-Owners Loan Corporation grades and achievement of cancer screening targets.
Result: Among 11,831 census tracts, 3,712 were classified as redlined (A: n = 842, 7.1% vs B: n = 2,314, 19.6% vs C: n = 4,963, 42.0% vs D: n = 3,712, 31.4%). Notably, 62.8% (n = 7,427), 21.2% (n = 2,511), and 27.3% (n = 3,235) of tracts met screening targets for breast, colon, and cervical cancer, respectively. After adjusting for present-day social vulnerability index and access to care metrics (population to primary care physician ratio and distance to nearest healthcare facility), redlined tracts were markedly less likely to meet breast (odds ratio [OR] 0.76, 95% CI 0.64 to 0.91), colon (OR 0.34, 95% CI 0.28 to 0.41), and cervical (OR 0.21, 95% CI 0.16 to 0.27) cancer screening targets compared with the "Best" tracts. Notably, poverty, lack of education, and limited English proficiency, among others, mediated the adverse effect of historical redlining on cancer screening.
Conclusions: Redlining as a surrogate for structural racism continues to adversely impact cancer screening. Policies that aim to make access to preventive cancer care more equitable for historically marginalized communities should be a public priority.
Copyright © 2023 by the American College of Surgeons. Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.
Similar articles
-
Historical redlining and clustering of present-day breast cancer factors.Cancer Causes Control. 2025 May;36(5):483-495. doi: 10.1007/s10552-024-01950-9. Epub 2025 Jan 4. Cancer Causes Control. 2025. PMID: 39755825
-
Historical Redlining and Heart Failure Outcomes Following Hospitalization in the Southeastern United States.J Am Heart Assoc. 2024 Apr 16;13(8):e032019. doi: 10.1161/JAHA.123.032019. Epub 2024 Apr 2. J Am Heart Assoc. 2024. PMID: 38563370 Free PMC article.
-
Associations between historical residential redlining and current age-adjusted rates of emergency department visits due to asthma across eight cities in California: an ecological study.Lancet Planet Health. 2020 Jan;4(1):e24-e31. doi: 10.1016/S2542-5196(19)30241-4. Lancet Planet Health. 2020. PMID: 31999951 Free PMC article.
-
Historic Residential Redlining and Present-Day Social Determinants of Health, Home Evictions, and Food Insecurity within US Neighborhoods.J Gen Intern Med. 2023 Nov;38(15):3321-3328. doi: 10.1007/s11606-023-08258-5. Epub 2023 Jun 9. J Gen Intern Med. 2023. PMID: 37296361 Free PMC article.
-
Connecting past to present: Examining different approaches to linking historical redlining to present day health inequities.PLoS One. 2022 May 19;17(5):e0267606. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0267606. eCollection 2022. PLoS One. 2022. PMID: 35587478 Free PMC article. Review.
Cited by
-
Persistent Effect of Redlining on Survival from Screenable Cancers in Washington State, 2000-2018.J Urban Health. 2025 Apr;102(2):290-304. doi: 10.1007/s11524-025-00973-0. J Urban Health. 2025. PMID: 40180692
-
Area-Level socioeconomic disadvantage and access to primary care: A rapid review.Health Aff Sch. 2025 Apr 2;3(4):qxaf066. doi: 10.1093/haschl/qxaf066. eCollection 2025 Apr. Health Aff Sch. 2025. PMID: 40264703 Free PMC article. Review.
-
ASO Author Reflections: Association Between Historical Redlining and Access to High-Volume Hospitals Among Patients Undergoing Complex Cancer Surgery in California.Ann Surg Oncol. 2024 Mar;31(3):1488-1489. doi: 10.1245/s10434-023-14729-0. Epub 2023 Dec 10. Ann Surg Oncol. 2024. PMID: 38071704 No abstract available.
-
Association of Socio-Environmental Burden and Inequality With Cancer Screening and Mortality.J Surg Oncol. 2025 May;131(6):1110-1117. doi: 10.1002/jso.28039. Epub 2024 Dec 17. J Surg Oncol. 2025. PMID: 39689056 Free PMC article.
-
State-Level Tax Policy, Cancer Screening, and Mortality Rates in the US.JAMA Netw Open. 2025 May 1;8(5):e258455. doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2025.8455. JAMA Netw Open. 2025. PMID: 40314956 Free PMC article.
References
-
- Siegel RL, Miller KD, Fuchs HE, Jemal A. Cancer statistics, 2022. CA Cancer J Clin. 2022;72:7–33.
-
- Siu AL. Screening for breast cancer: U.S. Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement. Ann Intern Med. 2016;164:279.
-
- Davidson KW, Barry MJ, Mangione CM, et al. Screening for colorectal cancer. JAMA. 2021;325:1965.
-
- Curry SJ, Krist AH, Owens DK, et al. Screening for cervical cancer. JAMA. 2018;320:674.
-
- Healthy People 2030. Increase the proportion of females who get screened for breast cancer. 2020. Available at: https://health.gov/healthypeople/objectives-and-data/browse-objectives/c... . Accessed October 16, 2022.