Cancer incidence and mortality rates in the United States are declining, but this decrease may not be observed in rural areas where residents are more likely to live in poverty, smoke, and forego cancer screening. However, there is limited research exploring national rural-urban differences in cancer incidence and trends. We analyzed data from the North American Association of Central Cancer Registries' public use dataset, which includes population-based cancer incidence data from 46 states. We calculated age-adjusted incidence rates, rate ratios, and annual percentage change (APC) for: all cancers combined, selected individual cancers, and cancers associated with tobacco use and human papillomavirus (HPV). Rural-urban comparisons were made by demographic, geographic, and socioeconomic characteristics for 2009 to 2013. Trends were analyzed for 1995 to 2013. Combined cancers incidence rates were generally higher in urban populations, except for the South, although the urban decline in incidence rate was greater than in rural populations (10.2% vs. 4.8%, respectively). Rural cancer disparities included higher rates of tobacco-associated, HPV-associated, lung and bronchus, cervical, and colorectal cancers across most population groups. Furthermore, HPV-associated cancer incidence rates increased in rural areas (APC = 0.724, < 0.05), while temporal trends remained stable in urban areas. Cancer rates associated with modifiable risks-tobacco, HPV, and some preventive screening modalities (e.g., colorectal and cervical cancers)-were higher in rural compared with urban populations. Population-based, clinical, and/or policy strategies and interventions that address these modifiable risk factors could help reduce cancer disparities experienced in rural populations.

Background Internet-based screening for sexually-transmitted infections (STIs) has been acceptable to women, and can reach high-risk populations. No prior literature describes internet-based screening for Chlamydia trachomatis, Neisseria gonorrhoeae, and Trichomonas vaginalis in men. We studied whether internet-based screening was acceptable and reached a high-risk population, and what risk factors were associated with STI positivity. Methods The website, www.iwantthekit.org, encouraged men ≥ 14 years of age to request a home self-sampling kit and a questionnaire on risk factors and acceptability of internet-based screening. Penile swabs and urine samples were tested for Chlamydia trachomatis, Neisseria gonorrhoeae, and Trichomonas vaginalis using a nucleic acid amplification test. Risk factors and acceptability were examined using chi-squared tests and logistic regression. Results Of 501 samples received for testing, 106 (21%) were positive for at least one STI, 64 (13%) for chlamydia, 4 (1%) for gonorrhea, and 49 (10%) for trichomonas. In multivariable analyses, age, race, household income, and frequency of condom use were independently associated with infection with at least one STI. Of respondents, 34% had a prior STI; 29% reported having a partner with an STI, but only 13% reported always using a condom. Seventy-seven percent of men preferred a self-administered specimen versus attending a clinic, 89% reported swab use was easy, and 89% would use internet-based screening again. Conclusions Men who access internet-based screening had known risk factors for STIs and had a high prevalence of infection. Internet-based screening was acceptable and could access these high-risk men, who might not otherwise be reached through traditional means.

No abstract

No abstract

Rural populations have higher rates of late stage lung cancer incidence and mortality compared to urban populations, making them important target populations for low dose computed tomography (LDCT) screening. LDCT screening has been shown to reduce lung cancer mortality and is recommended by the United States Preventive Services Task Force for individuals who meet certain risk criteria. However, rural populations may experience greater system, provider, and individual-level barriers to screening and related health-seeking behavior (e.g. smoking cessation). LDCT screening was first tested in urban, academic centers, so it is still unknown how readily it may be implemented in rural areas. Additionally, rural populations have limited access to both primary care physicians who may refer to LDCT screening and specialty physicians who may perform the screening. Further, rural populations may be less likely to seek screening due to lack of awareness and understanding or other unknown knowledge or psychosocial barriers. There are several strategies that may address these rural specific challenges. First, further research is needed to better understand the individual-level barriers that rural patients experience. Second, to reduce system-level barriers, additional efforts should be made to increase rural access to screening through improved referral processes. Third, creation of decision support materials to equip rural providers to engage their patients in a shared decision making process regarding screening may help reduce physician level barriers. Fourth, development of a holistic approach to smoking cessation may help reduce lung cancer risk in conjunction with LDCT screening.

No abstract

No abstract

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic has worsened the opioid overdose crisis in the US. Rural communities have been disproportionately affected by opioid use and people who use drugs in these settings may be acutely vulnerable to pandemic-related disruptions due to high rates of poverty, social isolation, and pervasive resource limitations. Methods: We performed a mixed-methods study to assess the impact of the pandemic in a convenience sample of people who use drugs in rural Illinois. We conducted 50 surveys capturing demographics, drug availability, drug use, sharing practices, and mental health symptoms. In total, 19 qualitative interviews were performed to further explore COVID-19 knowledge, impact on personal and community life, drug acquisition and use, overdose, and protective substance use adaptations. Results: Drug use increased during the pandemic, including the use of fentanyl products such as gel encapsulated “beans” and “buttons”. Disruptions in supply, including the decreased availability of heroin, increased methamphetamine costs and a concomitant rise in local methamphetamine production, and possible fentanyl contamination of methamphetamine was reported. Participants reported increased drug use alone, experience and/or witness of overdose, depression, anxiety, and loneliness. Consistent access to harm reduction services, including naloxone and fentanyl test strips, was highlighted as a source of hope and community resiliency. Conclusions: The COVID-19 pandemic period was characterized by changing drug availability, increased overdose risk, and other drug-related harms faced by people who use drugs in rural areas. Our findings emphasize the importance of ensuring access to harm reduction services, including overdose prevention and drug checking for this vulnerable population.