Citation: Alexander B. Dillon, Kevin Lin, Andrew Kwong, Susana Ortiz. Immunotherapy in Melanoma, Gastrointestinal (GI), and Pulmonary Malignancies[J]. AIMS Public Health, 2015, 2(1): 86-114. doi: 10.3934/publichealth.2015.1.86
[1] | LacreishaEjike-King, RashidaDorsey . Reducing Ex-offender Health Disparities through the Affordable Care Act: Fostering Improved Health Care Access and Linkages to Integrated Care. AIMS Public Health, 2014, 1(2): 76-83. doi: 10.3934/publichealth.2014.2.76 |
[2] | Carmenrita Infortuna, Xiaolin Yang, Ray Wang, Gianluca Pandolfo, Ilona Cazorla, Julian Dupont, Veolette Hanna, Valerie Iosim, Mirai Mikhail, Alex Yu, Stanley R. Terlecky, Florian P. Thomas, Jing Ren, Wenhua Cao, Zhiyong Han, Fortunato Battaglia . Medical students' distress during the transition to the endemic phase of COVID-19 in China: The association with temperament traits and attachment styles. AIMS Public Health, 2025, 12(1): 1-15. doi: 10.3934/publichealth.2025001 |
[3] | Allison DaSantos, Carlisle Goddard, Dalip Ragoobirsingh . Self-care adherence and affective disorders in Barbadian adults with type 2 diabetes. AIMS Public Health, 2022, 9(1): 62-72. doi: 10.3934/publichealth.2022006 |
[4] | Jacqueline C Wiltshire, Kimberly R Enard, Edlin Garcia Colato, Barbara Langland Orban . Problems paying medical bills and mental health symptoms post-Affordable Care Act. AIMS Public Health, 2020, 7(2): 274-286. doi: 10.3934/publichealth.2020023 |
[5] | Ilenia Piras, Vanessa Usai, Paolo Contu, Maura Galletta . Vicarious trauma, coping strategies and nurses' health outcomes: An exploratory study. AIMS Public Health, 2024, 11(4): 1071-1081. doi: 10.3934/publichealth.2024055 |
[6] | James A. Swartz, Dana Franceschini, Kamryn Scamperle . Mental health and substance use disorder comorbidities among Medicaid beneficiaries: Associations with opioid use disorder and prescription opioid misuse. AIMS Public Health, 2023, 10(3): 658-677. doi: 10.3934/publichealth.2023046 |
[7] | Shervin Assari . Incarceration's lingering health effects on Black men: impacts persist into retirement. AIMS Public Health, 2024, 11(2): 526-542. doi: 10.3934/publichealth.2024026 |
[8] | Areeb Khalid, Muhammad Waqar Younas, Hashim Khan, Muhammad Sarfraz Khan, Abdur Rehman Malik, Adam Umair Ashraf Butt, Basit Ali . Relationship between knowledge on COVID-19 and psychological distress among students living in quarantine: an email survey. AIMS Public Health, 2021, 8(1): 90-99. doi: 10.3934/publichealth.2021007 |
[9] | Aswin Sugunan, Rajasekharan Pillai K, Anice George . What is the coverage of your health insurance plan? An audit of hospital billing. AIMS Public Health, 2024, 11(4): 1013-1029. doi: 10.3934/publichealth.2024052 |
[10] | Bahar Kefeli Çol, Ayşe Gümüşler Başaran, Hilal Pekmezci . COVID-19 pandemic: Evaluating its psychological impact and individuals' depression, anxiety, and stress levels. AIMS Public Health, 2023, 10(3): 507-523. doi: 10.3934/publichealth.2023036 |
The United States (U.S.) incarcerates more people per capita than any other nation and the prison population has increased fourfold during the past 25 years [1]. As of 2009, nearly 1% of U.S. adults received their healthcare from their jailers (nearly 2.3 million inmates). Each year, almost 700,000 mentally ill people are placed in U.S. jails [2]. Studies in Chicago, IL, have suggested that 9% of male inmates had a severe mental disorder and 6% had an episode prior to arrest [2]. Freudenberg highlights a 1998 Bureau of Justice report suggesting 16% of state prison inmates, 7% of federal inmates, and 16% of probationers reported either a mental condition or overnight stay in the mental hospital [2]. Historically, the Epidemiological Catchment Area Study (ECA) was one of the first studies to estimate the point prevalence of mental illness among this segment of the U.S. population. The study found that prevalence rates of current and lifetime major depression, mania, schizophrenia, and other severe disorders were significantly higher among the jailed sample than within the entire five-city non-institutionalized sample of the ECA, even when controlling for race [3]. Other studies that followed affirmed the high rates of mental illness and distress among adjudicated females in the United States [4,5,6] and men internationally [7,8].
Prisoners in the U.S. have the right to health care, according to the Eighth Amendment. Still, there is little known about prisoners’ healthcare access and the linkage to mental health [1]. Using data from surveys examining health care utilization among local, state, and federal inmates, Wilper and colleagues [1] found an estimated 14% of federal inmates, 20% of state inmates, and 68% of local jail inmates received no medical examination since incarceration. Interestingly, almost 15% of federal inmates, 26% of state inmates, and 25% of local jail inmates had at least 1 previously diagnosed mental condition and most had taken medication prior to being incarcerated [1]. Also, most inmates in the study were in poor health, reporting high rates of chronic medical conditions, and self-reported substance abuse disorders [1,9]. In addition, federal reports detail increased rates of infectious disease (i.e. HIV/AIDS, Hepatitis C) among former inmates [10].
While accessing care is important among the incarcerated, researchers are also examining access to care among the formerly incarcerated. Once released, those previously incarcerated may experience increased risk of mortality due to drug overdoses, suicide, homicide, chronic conditions, and infectious diseases [11,12,13]. A study among the U.S. metropolitan area with the largest population of former prisoners, Los Angeles County, California, found formerly incarcerated individuals reported similar rates of trouble accessing medical care, health insurance coverage for 12 months, self-reported general health status; but higher proportions of depression when compared to the general population in Los Angeles County [14]. Among a sample of 324 formerly incarcerated respondents (235 males and 89 females) in Baltimore, Maryland, 30 percent reported wanting help in acquiring mental health treatment, one-fourth reported experiencing serious anxiety or depression, and one-fifth reported experiencing symptoms of Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) within three months of being released. However, only 10 percent reported private insurance coverage and less than 5 percent reported having a government based coverage option [15].
Having health insurance coverage has been linked to improvements in psychological health [16]. The Rand Health Insurance Experiment (HIE) estimated the effects of variation in cost sharing on the health status among randomly enrolled individuals and families from six U.S. city/county areas over a three year period beginning in November 1974. Findings from the HIE indicate individuals who had poorer psychological well-being (PWB) gained more improvement in PWB on the free plan (no cost sharing, no coinsurance, or individual deductible) than on plans with coinsurance [16]. Findings from the HIE regarding psychotherapy also indicate cost sharing reduced the probability of seeking mental health care, specifically within a given year [16]. During the 1990s, the HealthCare for Communities (HCC) study explored developments in health insurance coverage and perceived access to care for persons with mental illness compared to persons in the general population [17]. Focusing on participants who might have substance abuse or poorer financial status, results suggest participants with probable mental disorder were more likely to report having lost health insurance, to report health insurance as depreciated, and more likely to find that access to care had become more difficult. These individuals were also less likely to report gaining insurance, if they previously had no insurance coverage [17]. Individuals who reported these circumstances were more likely to be female, younger (age 34 or less), have lower income, and be less educated. When analyzing privately insured only, findings suggest individuals most at risk to suffer depressive disorder were also more likely to report trouble accessing health care when compared to those who were not likely sufferers of depressive disorder. Also, individuals who were privately insured with psychological distress (PD) were more likely to perceive their access to healthcare as more difficult than privately insured with normal mental health [17].
More recently, a study conducted by the National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS) of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) released findings from the 2001-2004 administrations of the National Health Interview Survey (NHIS). Using the Kessler 6 (K6) scale, the purpose of the study was to estimate the prevalence of serious psychological distress (SPD) among the noninstitutionalized adult population of the United States [18]. Results indicated greater proportions of SPD were found among adults who were: ages 18-44, female, had less than a high school diploma, living in poverty, unmarried, cigarette smokers, reporting chronic conditions, or reported utilizing more medical services. In addition, the study found that persons with SPD were four times more likely to have Medicaid than persons without SPD. Furthermore, adults with SPD were significantly more likely to be uninsured than adults without SPD [18].
According to the U.S. Department of Justice, in 1999 50% of individuals released from prison were 29 years of age or younger [19]. Although national findings detailing rates of mental disorders among the current incarcerated are more prevalent; little research examining psychological health in association with health care coverage after incarceration has been conducted, particularly among a younger segment of the population in the U.S., given previous reports suggesting health coverage is lower among younger adults [20]. Therefore, the purpose of this study is to estimate the point prevalence of psychological distress (PD) among young adults with incarceration experience, while comparing the prevalence to that of young adults with no incarceration experience. The odds of reporting PD given incarceration experience in comparison to no incarceration experience is also described. Additionally, this study characterizes the association of incarceration experience classification and PD given an individual’s health insurance coverage status among young adults. Lastly, we examine if other individual, contextual, and behavioral factors influence the association of incarceration experience and PD, in addition to their health insurance coverage status among young adults.
We analyzed data from the 2008 panel of the National Longitudinal Survey of Youth 97 (NLSY97), a population-based survey conducted by the U.S. Department of Labor since 1997. The U.S. Department of Labor began the NLSY97 to assemble data on the transition from school to work and into adulthood, collecting information on start and stop dates of jobs, occupation, industry, hours, earnings, job search, and benefits. Measures of education, work experience, length with an employer, and employer transitions were also obtained. Other information collected in a self-report questionnaire includes: youths’ relationships with parents, dating, sexual activity, criminal behavior, and alcohol and drug use [21]. The youths, who are now adults, continue to be interviewed on an annual basis.
In 2008, 7,490 participants took part in the NLSY97 follow-up interviews. At time of follow-up, participants were 23-29 years of age. Each round of interviews was conducted using a computer-assisted personal interview (CAPI) instrument, administered by an interviewer with a laptop computer. To ensure that accurate data were collected from Spanish-speaking respondents, both English and Spanish versions of all survey instruments were used, and bilingual Spanish-speaking interviewers were employed to administer the Spanish version to those requesting it. During the initial round, the Spanish version of the questionnaire was requested by 297 responding parents and 96 NLSY97 youths [22].
The key independent variable was having experienced incarceration. In the NLSY97, having incarceration experience may be assessed with the item entitled “After Incarceration: How hard to stay out of prison next five years?” The respondent is asked, How easy or hard do you think it will be to stay out of prison for the next five years? This item was asked only to participants who had been previously incarcerated, as persons asked this question were identified through previous survey questions during the panel interview or identified earlier during previous NLSY97 interviews. Therefore, we identified those not asked this question, as those with no incarceration experience.
Several questions determined if the respondent had full year, partial-year, or no health coverage during the past year. In order to ascertain full year, partial-year, or no health coverage during the past year, the following questions were examined in combination:
1) Do you have any kind of health care coverage, including health insurance, prepaid plans such as HMOs, or government plans such as Medicaid?; 2) Since [date of last interview], was there any time that you did not have any health insurance or coverage?; 3)Since [date of last interview], was there any time that you had health coverage?
The answer categories for these questions were dichotomous “Yes” and “No” responses. Question #2 was asked of participants whom answered “Yes” to question #1, while question #3 was asked of participants whom answered “No. ” Yes responses to questions #2 and #3 were combined to form the partial-year category for health insurance coverage. In order to determine type of health coverage, the question concerning primary health or hospitalization plan was employed: What is the source of your primary health or hospitalization plan? Is it from a policy from your current or previous employer, a policy bought directly from a medical insurance company, is it Medicaid or an alternative Medicaid provider, or is it from some other source?
In accordance to U.S. census status, persons indicating their source of plan from the military, Veterans Health Administration, prison system, or Medicaid or Medicaid provider/Medi-Cal/Medical Assist/Welfare/Medical Service were categorized as receiving government based health insurance coverage. Excluding “supervisor review” and “uncodable”, the other sources of health insurance coverage were categorized as private health insurance coverage [20]. The questions were combined in SAS 9.2 to create the following categories: Completely Uninsured; Partial-Year Insured/Unknown Source; Partial-Year Insured/Public; Partial-Year Insured/Private; Full year Insured/Public; and Full year Insured/Private. Full year coverage with private insurance was set as the referent category for analysis.
The Behavioral Model of Health Services Use suggests that health services use and health outcomes, such as PD are affected by social and individual determinants of health [23]. In the model, the predisposing, enabling, and need characteristics at the community and individual levels predict personal health practices, including the use of health services, and ultimately, health status. Individual measures may include demographic information, health conditions, and individual beliefs. Contextual characteristics are measured at the aggregate level and may include community characteristics and organizational characteristics such as: urban versus rural residential status. Health behaviors may include seeking medical services when injured or ill, not seeking medical services when injured or ill, and substance use [23].
In the Behavioral Model of Health Services Use, predisposing characteristics describe the propensity of individuals to use health services such as routine medical checkups or explain personal health practices such as substance use. Predisposing factors include socio-demographic characteristics such as gender (Male, Female), age, race/ethnicity (White, Black, Hispanic, Mixed), marital status (Never Married, Married, Separated, Divorced, Widowed), education (below high school graduation, high school graduate, and greater than high school graduate), household size (1-5, or more), place of residence (Rural, Urban, or Unknown), and geographic region (West, South, Northeast, North Central, or Unknown) of the United States [24]. Enabling characteristics refer to the individual’s ability to gain access to needed health services. Potential health care access issues are related to family resources such as insufficient household income (less than $20,000, $20,000-$34,999, $35,000-$54,999, $55,000-$74,999, $75,000 or more) and lack of adequate health insurance coverage [24]. Perceived need for care is also a component of this model. Need includes self-perception of health status (fair/poor vs. good & above), social satisfaction (1-5, 6-7, 8-9, 10 being the highest) and clinically diagnosed chronic conditions such as asthma, cardiovascular disease, and diabetes (yes or no) [24]. Self-perception of good health or overall social satisfaction may decrease perceived need for and subsequent use of health services. In contrast, patients with actual health needs are likely to have more health care encounters that may result in more opportunities to discuss other preventive health services with their health care provider [24]. Personal health practices are also described in the Behavioral Model of Health Services Use. Personal health practices include health behaviors such as using alcohol during work or school (yes or no), smoking cigarettes (smoker or non-smoker), and marijuana usage (user or non-user) [23].
The main outcome variable of interest was self-reported mental health status (PD) using the Mental Health Index 5 (MHI-5). The MHI-5 consists of 5 items from the full RAND 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey measuring mental wellbeing and mental distress [25,26]. Previous studies have suggested the MHI-5 is both comparable to other brief psychological measures, and internally consistent (α = 0.84) [27]. The items of the MHI-5 measure risk for suffering anxiety and depression, loss of behavioral or emotional control, and overall psychological well-being [28]. The 5-item measure of mental health contains the following questions: “How much of the time during the last month have you: (i) been a very nervous person? (ii) felt downhearted and blue? (iii) felt calm and peaceful? (iv) felt so down in the dumps that nothing could cheer you up? and, (v) been a happy person?” [29].
Within the self-reported questionnaire of the NLSY97, the participants were asked to rate questions on a 4-point scale. Each of the five questions were scored from 1 to 4: all of the time (1), most of the time (2), a little of the time (4), or none of the time. Because items (iii) and (v) ask about positive feelings, their scoring was reversed [30]. The five questions were combined and then changed through simple linear transformation to produce a continuous scale from range 0-100. Higher scores along the continuum indicate healthier psychological well-being. Additionally, research suggests that the scale has a cut-point in order to create a dichotomous measure for PD. Previous research has used a score of 52 for this purpose, with scores 52 or lower indicating PD [26,31].
Weights were applied using data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics to account for survey design, response rates and to yield national estimates for the young adult population of the U.S. We used chi-square tests to examine young adult population characteristics by incarceration experience and then examined the young adult population characteristics by mental health status. We then used logistic regression models to assess the bivariate association of incarceration experience and PD; incarceration experience and PD with health insurance status; incarceration experience and PD with health insurance and demographic variables; and incarceration experience and PD with predisposing, enabling, need, and access variables in addition to health insurance coverage. Covariates were selected based on a review of the scientific literature and variables that were available from the 2008 NLSY97 data. To obtain “better fit” models, covariates were added to the regression models controlling for basic demographic factors (age, gender, race, income, and education) and factors that differed significantly by incarceration experience and mental health status groupings. For all analyses, SAS version 9.2 (SAS Institute Inc., Cary, NC) was used. Analysis of the secondary data set received IRB approval (exempt status) from the University of South Carolina Internal Review Board on January 25, 2011.
In the 2008 panel of the NLSY97, 498 persons were formerly incarcerated. Those with incarceration experience were comprised of 405 (79.85%) males and 93 (20.15%) females. The participants surveyed with incarceration experience were 61.01% (205) Non-black/non-Hispanic (White), 22.88% (173) Black, 14.67% (115) Hispanic, and 1.44% (5) mixed. Over half of participants surveyed with incarceration experience had less than a high school degree. Almost 76% of those with incarceration experience had never been married (Table 1). Also of interest, approximately 57% of the formerly incarcerated were completely uninsured, when compared to slightly over 20% of those with no incarceration experience (Table 1). Additionally, greater proportions of those with incarceration experience reported PD (20.73%), compared to those with no incarceration experience (10.72%). Significant differences were also observed within self-reported life satisfaction, whereas 29.84% of those with incarceration experience reported life satisfaction at the lowest levels, versus those with no incarceration experience (12.32%) (Table 1).
aIndicates significant differences bIndicates non-weighted data c indicates weighted proportions data | ||||||
Covariates | Inc. Exp. | No Inc. Exp. | p-value | |||
n b | % c | n b | % c | α = 0.05 | ||
Age | < 0.0001 a | |||||
23-25 | 180 | 34.73 | 2948 | 41.23 | ||
26-29 | 318 | 65.27 | 4044 | 58.77 | ||
Gender | < 0.0001 a | |||||
Male | 405 | 79.85 | 3362 | 49.36 | ||
Female | 93 | 20.15 | 3630 | 50.64 | ||
Race and Ethnicity | < 0.0001 a | |||||
White | 205 | 61.01 | 3592 | 71.06 | ||
Black | 173 | 22.88 | 1853 | 14.92 | ||
Hispanic | 115 | 14.67 | 1480 | 12.73 | ||
Mixed | 5 | 1.44 | 67 | 1.29 | ||
Education | < 0.0001 a | |||||
< High School | 288 | 55.34 | 1298 | 16.21 | ||
= High School | 118 | 26.51 | 1807 | 25.06 | ||
> High School | 86 | 18.16 | 3822 | 58.73 | ||
Income | < 0.0001 a | |||||
< 20,000 | 175 | 30.93 | 703 | 14.85 | ||
20,000-34,999 | 77 | 16.48 | 986 | 13.93 | ||
35,000-54,999 | 73 | 16.50 | 1221 | 17.56 | ||
55,000-74,999 | 38 | 8.79 | 886 | 8.79 | ||
75,000+ | 48 | 10.89 | 1713 | 26.68 | ||
Unknown | 87 | 16.40 | 978 | 13.75 | ||
Marital Status | < 0.0001 a | |||||
Never Married | 390 | 75.98 | 4638 | 63.59 | ||
Married | 66 | 14.74 | 1960 | 30.68 | ||
Separated | 9 | 1.65 | 77 | 1.07 | ||
Divorced | 30 | 7.34 | 295 | 4.61 | ||
Widowed | 1 | 0.29 | 4 | 0.05 | ||
Household Size | < 0.0001 a | |||||
1 | 98 | 17.37 | 814 | 12.08 | ||
2 | 101 | 20.53 | 1886 | 29.72 | ||
3 | 117 | 24.70 | 1719 | 25.30 | ||
4 | 88 | 19.01 | 1302 | 17.82 | ||
5 or more | 94 | 18.40 | 1270 | 15.08 | ||
Place of Residence | < 0.0001 a | |||||
Rural | 108 | 25.29 | 1212 | 19.45 | ||
Urban | 375 | 71.99 | 5390 | 74.77 | ||
Unknown | 15 | 2.72 | 390 | 5.78 | ||
Region of Residence in United States | < 0.0001 a | |||||
West | 107 | 20.81 | 1581 | 21.92 | ||
South | 217 | 40.21 | 2802 | 36.68 | ||
Northeast | 52 | 11.60 | 1110 | 16.62 | ||
North Central | 118 | 26.95 | 1446 | 24.01 | ||
Unknown | 4 | 0.43 | 53 | 0.78 | ||
Health Factors | ||||||
Alcohol Usage Before and During Work | < 0.0001 a | |||||
None | 429 | 87.40 | 6432 | 93.14 | ||
User | 69 | 12.60 | 560 | 6.86 | ||
Smoke Cigarettes | < 0.0001 a | |||||
Non-Smoker | 193 | 34.91 | 4690 | 65.03 | ||
Smoker | 305 | 65.09 | 2302 | 34.97 | ||
Marijuana Usage | < 0.0001 a | |||||
None | 379 | 76.28 | 6088 | 86.53 | ||
User | 119 | 23.72 | 904 | 13.47 | ||
General Health | < 0.0001 a | |||||
Good and Above | 428 | 85.48 | 6382 | 92.25 | ||
Fair/Poor | 70 | 14.52 | 606 | 7.75 | ||
Life Satisfaction Score (1 = Least Satisfied) | < 0.0001 a | |||||
1-5 | 146 | 29.84 | 905 | 12.32 | ||
6-7 | 133 | 28.80 | 1793 | 25.49 | ||
8-9 | 136 | 27.59 | 3076 | 46.17 | ||
10 | 80 | 13.77 | 1205 | 16.02 | ||
Chronic Disease | < 0.0001 a | |||||
None | 461 | 93.37 | 6634 | 94.92 | ||
One or More | 37 | 6.63 | 355 | 5.08 | ||
Check-up during the past year | < 0.0001 a | |||||
No | 325 | 69.57 | 3294 | 49.09 | ||
Yes | 173 | 30.43 | 3687 | 50.91 | ||
Received Treatment in Past Year when ill or injured | < 0.0001 a | |||||
None | 351 | 68.41 | 4436 | 61.43 | ||
1 time | 77 | 17.08 | 1304 | 19.15 | ||
2 times | 28 | 4.98 | 622 | 9.56 | ||
3 times | 18 | 3.98 | 266 | 4.31 | ||
4 or more times | 22 | 5.56 | 353 | 5.56 | ||
Received No Treatment in Past Year when ill or injured | < 0.0001 a | |||||
None | 344 | 67.27 | 4158 | 58.09 | ||
1 time | 51 | 10.36 | 975 | 14.06 | ||
2 times | 49 | 11.51 | 868 | 13.08 | ||
3 times | 25 | 5.77 | 461 | 6.92 | ||
4 or more times | 24 | 5.09 | 502 | 7.85 | ||
Variables of Interest | ||||||
Health Insurance Coverage Type by Year | < 0.0001 a | |||||
Full-Year | Private | 71 | 16.85 | 3463 | 53.52 | ||
Full-Year | Government | 59 | 11.13 | 675 | 7.84 | ||
Partial-Year | Private | 15 | 3.58 | 510 | 7.85 | ||
Partial-Year | Government | 11 | 1.98 | 152 | 2.02 | ||
Partial-Year | Unknown | 48 | 9.31 | 597 | 8.28 | ||
Full-Year | Uninsured | 293 | 57.15 | 1582 | 20.48 | ||
Psychological Health | < 0.0001 a | |||||
Distressed | 95 | 20.73 | 738 | 10.72 | ||
Normal | 380 | 79.27 | 5915 | 89.28 |
An estimated 11.34% of young adults self-reported PD. Of those reporting PD, approximately 57% were female and almost 58% were between the ages of 26 and 29. Within those reporting PD, almost 68% were Non-Hispanic White, approximately 41% had greater than high school education, but approximately 22% earned less than $20,000.00 household income per year (Table 2). Approximately 77% of young adults reporting PD lived in urban areas. A sizable proportion reporting PD lived in the South (39%), reported smoking (52%), but almost 79% reported good or above overall health (Table 2). Regarding health care, roughly half reported a check-up during the past year and 53% reported not seeking medical treatment when injured or ill during the past year. An estimated 47% reporting PD also reported lowest levels of life satisfaction. The uninsured rate for this population was approximately 28% (Table 2).
aIndicates significant differences bIndicates non-weighted data c indicates weighted proportions data | ||||||
Table2. . | ||||||
Covariates | (PD) Psyc. Distress | Normal Mental Health | p-value | |||
n b | % c | n b | % c | α = 0.05 | ||
All | 833 | 11.34 | 6,295 | 88.66 | n/a | |
Gender | < 0.0001 a | |||||
Male | 346 | 42.71 | 3,212 | 51.97 | ||
Female | 487 | 57.29 | 3,083 | 48.03 | ||
Age | < 0.0001 a | |||||
23-25 | 363 | 42.18 | 2,621 | 40.74 | ||
26-29 | 470 | 57.82 | 3,674 | 59.26 | ||
Race and Ethnicity | < 0.0001 a | |||||
White | 395 | 67.71 | 3,294 | 71.72 | ||
Black | 248 | 17.93 | 1,625 | 14.46 | ||
Hispanic | 181 | 12.95 | 1,315 | 12.52 | ||
Mixed | 9 | 1.41 | 61 | 1.30 | ||
Education | < 0.0001 a | |||||
< High School | 266 | 30.29 | 1,206 | 16.77 | ||
= High School | 233 | 28.45 | 1,581 | 24.34 | ||
> High School | 325 | 41.26 | 3,454 | 58.89 | ||
Income | < 0.0001 a | |||||
< 20,000 | 209 | 22.44 | 1,086 | 14.68 | ||
20,000-34,999 | 121 | 14.77 | 902 | 14.11 | ||
35,000-54,999 | 129 | 16.35 | 1,119 | 17.90 | ||
55,000-74,999 | 88 | 10.35 | 805 | 13.50 | ||
75,000+ | 156 | 20.90 | 1,551 | 26.73 | ||
Unknown | 130 | 15.19 | 832 | 13.07 | ||
Marital Status | < 0.0001 a | |||||
Never Married | 594 | 68.61 | 4,163 | 63.38 | ||
Married | 171 | 22.07 | 1,791 | 31.17 | ||
Separated | 21 | 2.81 | 62 | 0.89 | ||
Divorced | 44 | 6.32 | 260 | 4.51 | ||
Widowed | 1 | 0.19 | 4 | 0.06 | ||
Household Size | < 0.0001 a | |||||
1 | 111 | 13.32 | 764 | 12.34 | ||
2 | 189 | 25.12 | 1,712 | 29.84 | ||
3 | 187 | 22.15 | 1,548 | 25.53 | ||
4 | 149 | 17.55 | 1,173 | 17.91 | ||
5 or more | 197 | 21.86 | 1,097 | 14.38 | ||
Place of Residence | < 0.0001 a | |||||
Rural | 138 | 18.49 | 1,116 | 19.94 | ||
Urban | 661 | 77.47 | 4,815 | 74.11 | ||
Unknown | 34 | 4.04 | 364 | 5.96 | ||
Region of Residence in United States | < 0.0001 a | |||||
West | 169 | 19.39 | 1,440 | 22.22 | ||
South | 348 | 39.18 | 2,507 | 36.32 | ||
Northeast | 133 | 16.66 | 970 | 16.24 | ||
North Central | 178 | 24.33 | 1,327 | 24.41 | ||
Unknown | 5 | 0.44 | 51 | 0.81 | ||
Health Factors | ||||||
Alcohol Usage Before and During Work | < 0.0001 a | |||||
None | 737 | 89.66 | 5,813 | 93.48 | ||
User | 96 | 10.34 | 482 | 6.52 | ||
Smoke Cigarettes | < 0.0001 a | |||||
Non-Smoker | 422 | 48.07 | 4,191 | 64.70 | ||
Smoker | 411 | 51.93 | 2,104 | 35.30 | ||
Marijuana Usage | < 0.0001 a | |||||
None | 647 | 77.69 | 5,495 | 86.80 | ||
User | 186 | 22.31 | 800 | 13.20 | ||
General Health | < 0.0001 a | |||||
Good and Above | 654 | 78.97 | 5,851 | 93.76 | ||
Fair/Poor | 178 | 21.03 | 443 | 6.24 | ||
Life Satisfaction Score (1 = Least Satisfied) | < 0.0001 a | |||||
1-5 | 373 | 46.65 | 620 | 9.03 | ||
6-7 | 255 | 29.75 | 1,562 | 24.90 | ||
8-9 | 140 | 17.71 | 2,965 | 49.20 | ||
10 | 61 | 5.88 | 1,142 | 16.88 | ||
Chronic Disease | < 0.0001 a | |||||
None | 794 | 95.72 | 5,964 | 94.84 | ||
One or More | 38 | 4.28 | 330 | 5.16 | ||
Check-up during the past year | < 0.0001 a | |||||
No | 407 | 50.55 | 3,033 | 50.26 | ||
Yes | 425 | 49.45 | 3,255 | 49.74 | ||
Received Treatment in Past Year when ill or injured | < 0.0001 a | |||||
None | 445 | 50.57 | 4,088 | 62.96 | ||
1 time | 153 | 19.18 | 1,176 | 19.16 | ||
2 times | 91 | 11.39 | 541 | 9.24 | ||
3 times | 39 | 5.20 | 228 | 4.10 | ||
4 or more times | 101 | 13.67 | 256 | 4.54 | ||
Received No Treatment in Past Year when ill or injured | < 0.0001 a | |||||
None | 458 | 53.25 | 3,800 | 58.94 | ||
1 time | 103 | 11.96 | 885 | 14.17 | ||
2 times | 96 | 13.06 | 785 | 13.11 | ||
3 times | 63 | 7.67 | 412 | 6.89 | ||
4 or more times | 105 | 14.07 | 397 | 6.89 | ||
Variables of Interest | ||||||
Health Insurance Coverage Type by Year | < 0.0001 a | |||||
Full-Year | Private | 261 | 34.61 | 3,153 | 54.08 | ||
Full-Year | Government | 142 | 15.55 | 543 | 6.93 | ||
Partial-Year | Private | 49 | 6.48 | 455 | 7.77 | ||
Partial-Year | Government | 32 | 3.30 | 117 | 1.76 | ||
Partial-Year | Unknown | 100 | 11.94 | 518 | 7.88 | ||
Full-Year | Uninsured | 248 | 28.12 | 1,501 | 21.58 | ||
Incarceration Experience | < 0.0001 a | |||||
Yes | 95 | 11.34 | 380 | 5.55 | ||
No | 738 | 88.66 | 5,915 | 94.45 |
In the crude analysis, young adults who had been previously incarcerated reported greater odds of PD than those with no incarceration experience (COR 2.18; 95% CI, 1.68-2.83) (Table 3). When introducing health insurance coverage status in the second model; the odds of reporting PD were reduced (AOR 1.73; 95% CI, 1.31-2.28) (Table 3). Interestingly, partial-year private coverage was the only insurance coverage classification not significant within the analysis (Table 3). In the third model (Model 2 plus Demographics), PD and incarceration experience remains significantly associated. Significant covariates in the model include all health insurance categories except partial-year private coverage, gender (AOR 1.54; 95% CI, 1.29-1.84), less than a high school graduation (AOR 1.26; 95% CI, 1.01-1.58), and greater than high school graduation (AOR 0.69; 95% CI, 0.56-0.86) (Table 3). In the final analysis (Model 4) adjusted for Andersen covariates, the PD and incarceration experience is no longer significantly associated. Significant covariates in the model include gender (AOR 1.54; 95% CI, 1.23-1.85), marijuana usage (AOR 1.34; 95% CI, 1.06-1.70), reporting fair or poor health (AOR 1.54; 95% CI, 1.17-2.03), receiving treatment 4 or more times in the past year when ill or injured (AOR 1.79; 95% CI, 1.25-2.56), lower life satisfaction reporting (1-5) (AOR 12.45; 95% CI, 8.62-18.25) and life satisfaction reporting (6-7) (AOR 3.36; 95% CI, 2.34-4.83) (Table 3).
aIndicates significant differences ** Demographic variables include age, gender, race/ethnicity, education, and income. *** Andersen Model covariates includes age, gender, race/ethnicity, education, income, health insurance status, marital status, household size, place of residence, U.S. region, usage of alcohol during school or work, tobacco usage, marijuana usage, chronic disease, receiving treatment when ill or injured, not receiving treatment when ill or injured, and life satisfaction. | ||
Model (referent = no incarceration experience) | OR | 95% CI |
Model 1 Formerly Incarcerated | ||
Yes | 2.18 | (1.68-2.83) a |
No | 1.00 | Referent |
Model 2 Incarceration Experience x Health Insurance Status | ||
Formerly Incarcerated | ||
Yes | 1.73 | (1.31-2.28) a |
No | 1.00 | Referent |
Health Insurance Status | ||
Full-Year | Private | 1.00 | Referent |
Full-Year | Government | 3.37 | (2.62-4.33) a |
Partial-Year | Private | 1.29 | (0.92-1.83) |
Partial-Year | Government | 2.86 | (1.79-4.57) a |
Partial-Year | Unknown | 2.30 | (1.75-3.03) a |
Full-Year | Uninsured | 1.86 | (1.51-2.30) a |
Model 3 Incarceration Experience x Health Insurance x Demographics** | ||
Formerly Incarcerated | ||
Yes | 1.70 | (1.27-2.27) a |
No | 1.00 | Referent |
Health Insurance Status | ||
Full-Year | Private | 1.00 | Referent |
Full-Year | Government | 2.24 | (1.67-3.02) a |
Partial-Year | Private | 1.21 | (0.85-1.73) |
Partial-Year | Government | 1.84 | (1.09-3.13) a |
Partial-Year | Unknown | 1.99 | (1.49-2.66) a |
Full-Year | Uninsured | 1.54 | (1.21-1.95) a |
Significant Demographic Covariates | ||
Gender | ||
Female | 1.54 | (1.29-1.84) a |
Male | 1.00 | Referent |
Education | ||
< High School | 1.26 | (1.01-1.58) a |
= High School | 1.00 | Referent |
> High School | 0.69 | (0.56-0.86) a |
Model 4 Incarceration Experience x Health Insurance x Andersen Model Covariates*** | ||
Formerly Incarcerated | ||
Yes | 1.30 | (0.94-1.80) |
No | 1.00 | Referent |
Health Insurance Status | ||
Full-Year | Private | 1.00 | Referent |
Full-Year | Government | 1.32 | (0.94-1.85) |
Partial-Year | Private | 1.00 | (0.68-1.47) |
Partial-Year | Government | 0.83 | (0.44-1.59) |
Partial-Year | Unknown | 1.33 | (0.96-1.84) |
Full-Year | Uninsured | 1.01 | (0.77-1.33) |
Significant Andersen Covariates | ||
Gender | ||
Female | 1.50 | (1.23-1.85) a |
Male | 1.00 | Referent |
Marijuana Usage | ||
Yes | 1.34 | (1.06-1.70) a |
No | ||
General Health | ||
Good and Above | 1.00 | Referent |
Fair/Poor | 1.54 | (1.17-2.03) a |
Received Treatment in Past Year when ill or injured | ||
None | 1.00 | Referent |
1 time | 1.15 | (0.90-1.47) |
2 times | 1.24 | (0.91-1.69) |
3 times | 1.08 | (0.68-1.72) |
4 or more times | 1.79 | (1.25-2.56) a |
Life Satisfaction Score (1 = Least Satisfied) | ||
1-5 | 12.45 | (8.62-18.25) a |
6-7 | 3.36 | (2.34-4.83) a |
8-9 | 1.18 | (0.81-1.72) |
10 | 1.00 | Referent |
A nationally representative data set of young adults in the United States was used to demonstrate the association of reporting PD when having experienced incarceration. Furthermore, an exploration of how one’s health insurance status alone may confound the relationship of incarceration experience and PD was conducted. This relationship was also examined in the presence of demographic and other covariates. In this study, health insurance status is extended beyond having reported coverage (yes or no) during the past year, but also examines what type of health insurance individuals might have, and if they had coverage for the entire year. Findings from this study are in accord with earlier research showing that different types of health insurance are associated with poorer mental health [16,17,18]. Similarly, this study demonstrates the prevalence of PD is significantly greater in the formerly prisoned population versus the general population when examining young American adults [3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10]. Among young adults with incarceration experience, roughly 21% reported PD, greater proportions reported being uninsured for the full year and lower proportions reported having had a medical check-up during the past year. Additionally, roughly 67% of formerly incarcerated young adults reported not seeking medical treatment when injured or ill during the past year.
By using methodologies similar to Pratt et al. [18], we found that PD is associated with many individual and contextual characteristics, health behaviors, and accessing medical care among young adults. Although the population dataset in the CDC study used NHIS data from 2001-2004 and included adults of all ages, findings between this study and the previous study are similar. For example, both studies found greater proportions of reporting PD among the lower age groups (younger adults), females, individuals living in poverty, persons unmarried, smokers, individuals with chronic conditions, and persons who utilized more medical services. Contrasting the study by Pratt et al., PD was reported in greater proportions among young adults with greater than high school education and full-year private insurance coverage in the bivariate analysis of the present study.
When examining PD in association with incarceration, results affirmed individuals with incarceration experience reported greater odds of PD. Additionally, findings from the data indicate health insurance status confounds the association between incarceration status and PD. Findings suggest that government-based health insurance adds to the risk of reporting PD among the formerly incarcerated. Although diminished in the presence of demographic variables, the risk of reporting PD is still greatest among formerly incarcerated young adults with full-year government based coverage. However, in the presence of other covariates, PD is explained by female gender, 30 day marijuana usage, reporting fair or poor health, lower levels of life satisfaction, and receiving medical treatment when ill or injured 4 or more times during the past year.
Challenges such as finding jobs with employer-based health coverage or problems with Medicaid enrollment may hinder those with incarceration experience from receiving health insurance coverage [32] or perhaps may be associated with more distress due to trouble accessing medical services [17]. One study estimates that roughly 34-40 percent of released inmates will qualify for Medicaid [32], and perhaps those that receive Medicaid will still experience PD. However, the need for health care, the complexity of social situations, fragmented social and family networks, and mental health needs; may be barriers to many individuals with incarceration experience accessing health care coverage [32], thus widening the gap for the formerly incarcerated to access care [14,15] and presenting opportunity for future research. In this study, receiving treatment 4 or more times when ill or injured was significantly associated with PD in the logistic regression analyis. This is of great concern, as providing health insurance coverage for this population is only the first step to improving the health among young adults with incaceration experience. Although this group can be served by Medicaid, especially with Medicaid’s expansion under the Affordable Care Act (ACA) [33], individuals with incarceration experience have relied on safety net resources to meet their health needs, such as emergency rooms. The ACA promotes the adoption of patient centered medical homes and preventive care. Thus it will be important to integrate mental health care with physical health care to support the reintegration of the formerly incarcerated into the community [32].
Life satisfaction was rated lower in greater proportion among the young adults with incarceration experience than among those with no incarceration experience. These findings among young adults, specifically those with incarceration experience, support the use of frameworks that consider individual beliefs (need characteristics), as well as predisposing and enabling factors when examining self-reported health outcomes at the population level. In order to depict a comprehensive representation of one’s total health and functioning, health care professionals and health systems must examine not only one’s physical and mental health, but also assess one’s social health. In this study, the social health indicator “life satisfaction” was significantly associated with mental health and incarceration experience. Similarly, self-reported general health status (global health assessment) was also significantly associated with mental health.
The results of this study should be viewed through a perspective of several limitations. This report is limited by the self-report nature of the NLSY97. First, recall bias may limit some of the responses due to solicitation of information for the past 30 days, over the past year, or questions pertaining to ever experiencing certain conditions or problems. Secondly, although the MHI-5 has been used in population-based surveys, the characterization of the cut-point to categorize PD and normal mental health is receiving additional examination. Although previous studies have used 52 as the cut-off point when using the MHI-5, one study has indicated the use of higher cut-off points including 54 and 74 for different clinical purposes [34], and 60 or 68 in another study of similar scope [35]. Still, it is important to note that these studies use different gold standards to compare the MHI-5 measure and both studies suggest more research is needed among different populations to determine a true standard cut-off point.
Another limitation of this study is the NLSY97 data used in this analysis did not ask questions about mental health knowledge, attitudes, beliefs, or behavioral intentions. This additional information would have been useful in performing data analysis and taking into consideration a factor such as stigma with mental illnesses, mental illness treatment, or social desirability. The results may also be limited by missing data. Of the 8,894 participants of the NLSY97 study, 1,494 (16.8%) of the study population is missing due to not being interviewed during 2008. For example, included in the missing data within the study population may be active military serving the U.S. overseas.
Due to the cross-sectional analysis of the data from 2008, the temporal sequence for causation PD among young adults cannot be determined. Furthermore, the direction of associations is uncertain as poorer health status may lead to loss of health insurance coverage or gain, while lack of health insurance may worsen one’s health; subsequently influencing medical treatment utilization. Moreover, the covariates in our logistic regression analysis may inaptly reduce the crude association between incarceration and PD, and the relationship adjusted by health insurance status. For example, marijuana usage, lower life satisfaction, poorer self-report general health status, and greater treatment seeking when ill or injured may result from PD. In focus, finding a covariate within the data linked to incarceration status but not associated with PD, and then examining differences in the incarceration variable induced by that covariate to assess incarceration’s relationship to PD; would allow for a more valid representation of the association [36]. Still, to address endogenous variables by finding an instrumental variable is difficult and the variation in the explanatory variable may not be enough to establish the effect on the dependent variable [36]. However, one study has demonstrated an increase of the protective effect of health insurance on mortality by using an instrumental variable to account for endogeneity bias [37], thus providing opportunity for additional research.
Despite these limitations, this study is innovative because it takes a population based approach to examining the mental health status of a defined group that is at risk for poorer mental health due to their stage and station in life. Although not generalizable to the entire U.S. population, one strength of the study is its focus on the young adult population. Many studies focus on wide age categories such as 18-64 or 25-44 years of age. This study specifically examines adults, ages 23-29 years old, an age group encompassing almost half of formerly incarcerated undergoing reentry [12]. Furthermore, the random selection of the original cohort and the weighting of the data, allow this study to make population based estimates of PD for young adults and for the segment of the young adult population whom have incarceration experience. Unlike other population based surveys, the NLSY97 data does not rely solely on telephone based interviews. The interview staff conducted interviews in person, over the phone or in other settings. This allows for more concrete information to be gathered and avoids selection bias by participants who may change location frequently or may only have a cell phone. Finally, examining health insurance status beyond a simple dichotomous variable provides for a more detailed account of how type and length of coverage may influence mental health status.
European studies and publications from the World Health Organization have well documented the prevalence rates of PD. Recent publications in the Journal of International Health and other government documents have reported SPD and PD in the United States. To date, few if any studies have focused on the young adult population of the United States, and less focusing on the impact of health insurance coverage status, especially in a population with incarceration experience. The proportion of Americans who have experienced incarceration has grown over the years. Still, little is known about the ability of young adults within this group to access health care given insurance status and their psychological well-being. This study offered a unique opportunity to estimate the rate of PD within this vulnerable sub-group and compare it to that of the general young adult population. Given the ongoing implementation of the ACA since 2010 and the age group in this study, implications for young adult enrollment may contribute to increasing health equity within this segment of the population [38]. Interventions directly targeting this group may have a significant impact on improving health outcomes for those with incarceration experience and their families, thus impacting the community.
This work was supported by the 2010-2011 Alvin R. Tarlov & John E. Ware Jr. Doctoral Dissertation and Post- Doctoral Awards in Patient Reported Outcomes by the Health Assessment Laboratory at Dartmouth College.
All authors declare no conflicts of interest in this paper.
[1] | Coley WB (1893) The Treatment of Malignant Tumors by Repeated Innoculations of Erysipelas: With a Report of Ten Original Cases. Am J Med Sci 10: 487-511. |
[2] | Pick TP (1899) Surgery: Green. 1208 p. |
[3] |
Menzies SW, McCarthy WH (1997) Complete regression of primary cutaneous malignant melanoma. Arch Surg 132: 553-556. doi: 10.1001/archsurg.1997.01430290099020
![]() |
[4] |
Quaglino P, Marenco F, Osella-Abate S, et al. (2010) Vitiligo is an independent favourable prognostic factor in stage III and IV metastatic melanoma patients: results from a single-institution hospital-based observational cohort study. Ann Onc 21: 409-414. doi: 10.1093/annonc/mdp325
![]() |
[5] |
Topalian SL, Sznol M, McDermott DF, et al. (2014) Survival, durable tumor remission, and long-term safety in patients with advanced melanoma receiving nivolumab. J Clin Onc 32:1020-1030. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2013.53.0105
![]() |
[6] |
Rosenberg SA, Yang JC, Sherry RM, et al. (2011) Durable Complete Responses in Heavily Pretreated Patients with Metastatic Melanoma Using T-Cell Transfer Immunotherapy. Clin Cancer Res 17: 4550-4557. doi: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-11-0116
![]() |
[7] |
McDermott D, Lebbé|C, Hodi FS, et al. (2014) Durable benefit and the potential for long-term survival with immunotherapy in advanced melanoma. Cancer Treat Rev 40: 1056-1064. doi: 10.1016/j.ctrv.2014.06.012
![]() |
[8] |
Sanlorenzo M, Vujic I, Posch C, et al. (2014) Melanoma immunotherapy. Cancer Biol Ther 15:665-674. doi: 10.4161/cbt.28555
![]() |
[9] | Avril MF, Aamdal S, Grob JJ, et al. (2004) Fotemustine compared with dacarbazine in patients with disseminated malignant melanoma: a phase III study. J Clin Onc.22: 1118-1125. |
[10] |
Garbe C, Eigentler TK, Keilholz U, et al. (2011) Systematic Review of Medical Treatment in Melanoma: Current Status and Future Prospects. Oncologist 16: 5-24. doi: 10.1634/theoncologist.2010-0190
![]() |
[11] |
Hervas-Stubbs S, Perez-Gracia JL, Rouzaut A, et al. (2011) Direct effects of type I interferons on cells of the immune system. Clin Cancer Res 17: 2619-2627. doi: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-10-1114
![]() |
[12] | Kirkwood JM, Strawderman MH, Ernstoff MS, et al. (1996) Interferon alfa-2b adjuvant therapy of high-risk resected cutaneous melanoma: the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Trial EST1684. J Clin Onc 14: 7-17. |
[13] |
Payne MJ, Argyropoulou K, Lorigan P, et al. (2014) Phase II Pilot Study of Intravenous High-Dose Interferon With or Without Maintenance Treatment in Melanoma at High Risk of Recurrence. J Clin Onc 32: 185-190. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2013.49.8717
![]() |
[14] | Di Trolio R, Simeone E, Di Lorenzo G, et al. (2014) The use of interferon in melanoma patients: A systematic review. Cytokine Growth Factor Rev Epub |
[15] |
Kaufman HL, Kirkwood JM, Hodi FS, et al. (2013) The Society for Immunotherapy of Cancer consensus statement on tumour immunotherapy for the treatment of cutaneous melanoma. Nat Rev Clin Onc 10: 588-598. doi: 10.1038/nrclinonc.2013.153
![]() |
[16] | Baker DE (2001) Pegylated interferons. Rev Gastroenterol Disord 1: 87-99. |
[17] |
Eggermont AMM, Suciu S, Testori A, et al. (2012) Ulceration and stage are predictive of interferon efficacy in melanoma: results of the phase III adjuvant trials EORTC 18952 and EORTC 18991. Eur J Cancer 48: 218-225. doi: 10.1016/j.ejca.2011.09.028
![]() |
[18] |
Hofmann MA, Kiecker F, Küchler I, et al. (2011) Serum TNF-α, B2M and sIL-2R levels are biological correlates of outcome in adjuvant IFN-α2b treatment of patients with melanoma. J Cancer Res Clin Onc 137: 455-462. doi: 10.1007/s00432-010-0900-1
![]() |
[19] |
Flaherty LE, Othus M, Atkins MB, et al. (2014) Southwest Oncology Group S0008: A Phase III Trial of High-Dose Interferon Alfa-2b Versus Cisplatin, Vinblastine, and Dacarbazine, Plus Interleukin-2 and Interferon in Patients With High-Risk Melanoma-An Intergroup Study of Cancer and Leukemia Group B, Children's Oncology Group, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group, and Southwest Oncology Group. J Clin Onc 32: 3771-3778. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2013.53.1590
![]() |
[20] |
Kim KB, Legha SS, Gonzalez R, et al. (2009) A randomized phase III trial of biochemotherapy versus interferon-alpha-2b for adjuvant therapy in patients at high risk for melanoma recurrence. Melanoma Res 19: 42-49. doi: 10.1097/CMR.0b013e328314b84a
![]() |
[21] | Atkins MB, Kunkel L, Sznol M, et al. (2000) High-dose recombinant interleukin-2 therapy in patients with metastatic melanoma: long-term survival update. Cancer J Sc Am 6: S11-14. |
[22] |
Schwartzentruber DJ (2001) Guidelines for the safe administration of high-dose interleukin-2. J Immunotherapy (Hagerstown, Md: 1997) 24: 287-293. doi: 10.1097/00002371-200107000-00004
![]() |
[23] |
Petrella T, Quirt I, Verma S, et al. (2007) Single-agent interleukin-2 in the treatment of metastatic melanoma: A systematic review. Cancer Treat Rev 33: 484-496. doi: 10.1016/j.ctrv.2007.04.003
![]() |
[24] |
Joseph RW, Sullivan RJ, Harrell R, et al. (2012) Correlation of NRAS Mutations With Clinical Response to High-dose IL-2 in Patients With Advanced Melanoma. J Immunotherapy 35: 66-72. doi: 10.1097/CJI.0b013e3182372636
![]() |
[25] | Keilholz U, Conradt C, Legha SS, et al. (1998) Results of interleukin-2-based treatment in advanced melanoma: a case record-based analysis of 631 patients. J Clin Onc 16: 2921-2929. |
[26] |
Byers BA, Temple-Oberle CF, Hurdle V, et al. (2014) Treatment of in-transit melanoma with intra-lesional interleukin-2: A systematic review. J Surg Onc 110: 770-775. doi: 10.1002/jso.23702
![]() |
[27] |
Boyd KU, Wehrli BM, Temple CLF (2011) Intra-lesional interleukin-2 for the treatment of in-transit melanoma. J Surg Onc 104: 711-717. doi: 10.1002/jso.21968
![]() |
[28] | Daud AI, DeConti RC, Andrews S, et al. (2008) Phase I trial of interleukin-12 plasmid electroporation in patients with metastatic melanoma. J Clin Onc 26: 5896-5903. |
[29] |
Dillman RO, Cornforth AN, Depriest C, et al. (2012) Tumor stem cell antigens as consolidative active specific immunotherapy: a randomized phase II trial of dendritic cells versus tumor cells in patients with metastatic melanoma. J Immunotherapy 35: 641-649. doi: 10.1097/CJI.0b013e31826f79c8
![]() |
[30] |
Dillman RO, DePriest C, Ellis RA (2014) Long-term survival for patients with detectable metastatic melanoma at time of treatment with patient-specific tumor stem cell vaccines. J Clin Onc 32: 5s. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2013.49.4757
![]() |
[31] |
Dudley ME, Yang JC, Sherry R, et al. (2008) Adoptive cell therapy for patients with metastatic melanoma: evaluation of intensive myeloablative chemoradiation preparative regimens. J Clin Onc 26: 5233-5239. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2008.16.5449
![]() |
[32] |
Radvanyi LG, Bernatchez C, Zhang M, et al. (2012) Specific lymphocyte subsets predict response to adoptive cell therapy using expanded autologous tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes in metastatic melanoma patients. Clin Cancer Res 18: 6758-6770. doi: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-12-1177
![]() |
[33] |
Besser MJ, Shapira-Frommer R, Treves AJ, et al. (2010) Clinical responses in a phase II study using adoptive transfer of short-term cultured tumor infiltration lymphocytes in metastatic melanoma patients. Clin Cancer Res 16: 2646-2655. doi: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-10-0041
![]() |
[34] |
Collins AV, Brodie DW, Gilbert RJC, et al. (2002) The interaction properties of costimulatory molecules revisited. Immunity 17: 201-210. doi: 10.1016/S1074-7613(02)00362-X
![]() |
[35] |
Hodi FS, O'Day SJ, McDermott DF, et al. (2010) Improved survival with ipilimumab in patients with metastatic melanoma. N Engl J Med 363: 711-723. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1003466
![]() |
[36] |
Wolchok JD, Neyns B, Linette G, et al. (2010) Ipilimumab monotherapy in patients with pretreated advanced melanoma: a randomised, double-blind, multicentre, phase 2, dose-ranging study. Lancet Onc 11: 155-164. doi: 10.1016/S1470-2045(09)70334-1
![]() |
[37] |
Robert C, Thomas L, Bondarenko I, et al. (2011) Ipilimumab plus dacarbazine for previously untreated metastatic melanoma. N Engl J Med 364: 2517-2526. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1104621
![]() |
[38] |
Lebbé|C, Weber JS, Maio M, et al. (2014) Survival follow-up and ipilimumab retreatment of patients with advanced melanoma who received ipilimumab in prior phase II studies. Ann Onc/ESMO 25: 2277-2284. doi: 10.1093/annonc/mdu441
![]() |
[39] | Schadendorf D, FS Hodi, C Robert, et al. (2013) Pooled analysis of long-term survival data from phase II and phase III trials of ipilimumab in metastatic or locally advanced, unresectable melanoma. ESMO 2013 Congress. |
[40] |
Chiarion-Sileni V, Pigozzo J, Ascierto PA, et al. (2014) Ipilimumab retreatment in patients with pretreated advanced melanoma: the expanded access programme in Italy. Br J Cancer 110:1721-1726. doi: 10.1038/bjc.2014.126
![]() |
[41] |
Dequen P, Lorigan P, Jansen JP, et al. (2012) Systematic review and network meta-analysis of overall survival comparing 3 mg/kg ipilimumab with alternative therapies in the management of pretreated patients with unresectable stage III or IV melanoma. Oncologist 17: 1376-1385. doi: 10.1634/theoncologist.2011-0427
![]() |
[42] |
Ascierto PA, Simeone E, Sileni VC, et al. (2014) Sequential treatment with ipilimumab and BRAF inhibitors in patients with metastatic melanoma: data from the Italian cohort of the ipilimumab expanded access program. Cancer Inves. 32: 144-149. doi: 10.3109/07357907.2014.885984
![]() |
[43] |
Hodi FS, Lee S, McDermott DF, et al. (2014) Ipilimumab plus sargramostim vs ipilimumab alone for treatment of metastatic melanoma: A randomized clinical trial. JAMA 312: 1744-1753. doi: 10.1001/jama.2014.13943
![]() |
[44] |
Bapodra A, Silva IEDPD, Lui KP, et al. (2014) Clinical outcome and CD4+ differentiation in anti-CTLA-4/radiation and anti-CTLA-4/steroid therapy. J Clin Onc 32:5s. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2013.49.4757
![]() |
[45] |
Downey SG, Klapper JA, Smith FO, et al. (2007) Prognostic factors related to clinical response in patients with metastatic melanoma treated by CTL-associated antigen-4 blockade. Clin Cancer Res 13: 6681-6688. doi: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-07-0187
![]() |
[46] |
Eggermont AM, Chiarion-Sileni V, Grob JJ, et al. (2014) Ipilimumab versus placebo after complete resection of stage III melanoma: Initial efficacy and safety results from the EORTC 18071 phase III trial. J Clin Onc 32: 5s. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2013.49.4757
![]() |
[47] |
Hamid O, Schmidt H, Nissan A, et al. (2011) A prospective phase II trial exploring the association between tumor microenvironment biomarkers and clinical activity of ipilimumab in advanced melanoma. J Transl Med 9: 204. doi: 10.1186/1479-5876-9-204
![]() |
[48] |
Adaniel C, Rendleman J, Polsky D, et al. (2014) Germline genetic determinants of immunotherapy response in metastatic melanoma. J Clin Onc 32:5s. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2013.49.4757
![]() |
[49] |
Freeman-Keller M, Weber JS (2015) Anti-programmed death receptor 1 immunotherapy in melanoma: rationale, evidence and clinical potential. Ther Adv Med Onc 7: 12-21. doi: 10.1177/1758834014551747
![]() |
[50] | Weber JS, Minor DR, D'Angelo S, et al. (2014) A Phase 3 randomized, open-label study of nivolumab (anti-PD-1|BMS-936558|ONO-4538) versus investigator's choice chemotherapy (ICC) in patients with advanced melanoma after prior anti-CTLA-4 therapy. ESMO 2014 Congress. |
[51] |
Hamid O, Robert C, Daud A, et al. (2013) Safety and tumor responses with lambrolizumab (anti-PD-1) in melanoma. N Engl J Med 369: 134-144. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1305133
![]() |
[52] |
Robert C, Ribas A, Wolchok JD, et al. (2014) Anti-programmed-death-receptor-1 treatment with pembrolizumab in ipilimumab-refractory advanced melanoma: a randomised dose-comparison cohort of a phase 1 trial. The Lancet 384: 1109-1117. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(14)60958-2
![]() |
[53] | Robert C, Joshua AM, Weber AS (2014) Pembrolizumab (pembro|MK-3475) for advanced melanoma (MEL): Randomized comparison of two dosing schedules. ESMO 2014 Congress. |
[54] |
Ribas A, Hodi FS, Kefford R, et al. (2014) Efficacy and safety of the anti-PD-1 monoclonal antibody MK-3475 in 411 patients (pts) with melanoma (MEL). J Clin Onc 32:5s. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2013.49.4757
![]() |
[55] |
Kefford R, Ribas A, Hamid O, et al. (2014) Clinical efficacy and correlation with tumor PD-L1 expression in patients (pts) with melanoma (MEL) treated with the anti-PD-1 monoclonal antibody MK-3475. J Clin Onc 32:5s. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2013.49.4757
![]() |
[56] |
Wolchok JD, Kluger H, Callahan MK, et al. (2013) Nivolumab plus ipilimumab in advanced melanoma. N Engl J Med 369: 122-133. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1302369
![]() |
[57] | Sharabi AB, Nirschl CJ, Kochel CM, et al. (2014) Stereotactic Radiation Therapy Augments Antigen-Specific PD-1 Mediated Anti-Tumor Immune Responses via Cross-Presentation of Tumor Antigen. Cancer Immunol Res.: canimm.0196.2014. |
[58] |
Brahmer JR, Tykodi SS, Chow LQM, et al. (2012) Safety and activity of anti-PD-L1 antibody in patients with advanced cancer. N Engl J Med 366: 2455-2465. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1200694
![]() |
[59] |
Fonsatti E, Maio M, Altomonte M, et al. (2010) Biology and Clinical Applications of CD40 in Cancer Treatment. Seminars Onc 37: 517-523. doi: 10.1053/j.seminoncol.2010.09.002
![]() |
[60] |
Vonderheide RH, Flaherty KT, Khalil M, et al. (2007) Clinical activity and immune modulation in cancer patients treated with CP-870,893, a novel CD40 agonist monoclonal antibody. J Clin Onc 25: 876-883. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2006.08.3311
![]() |
[61] |
Hemon P, Jean-Louis F, Ramgolam K, et al. (2011) MHC class II engagement by its ligand LAG-3 (CD223) contributes to melanoma resistance to apoptosis. J Immunol 186: 5173-5183. doi: 10.4049/jimmunol.1002050
![]() |
[62] |
Baitsch L, Baumgaertner P, Devêvre E, et al. (2011) Exhaustion of tumor-specific CD8+ T cells in metastases from melanoma patients. J Clin Invest 121: 2350-2360. doi: 10.1172/JCI46102
![]() |
[63] |
da Silva IP, Gallois A, Jimenez-Baranda S, et al. (2014) Reversal of NK-cell exhaustion in advanced melanoma by Tim-3 blockade. Cancer Immunol Res 2: 410-422. doi: 10.1158/2326-6066.CIR-13-0171
![]() |
[64] | Lombardi VC, Khaiboullina SF, Rizvanov AA (2015) Plasmacytoid dendritic cells, a role in neoplastic prevention and progression. Eur J Clin Invest 45: 1-8. |
[65] |
Aspord C, Tramcourt L, Leloup C, et al. (2014) Imiquimod inhibits melanoma development by promoting pDC cytotoxic functions and impeding tumor vascularization. J Invest Derm 134:2551-2561. doi: 10.1038/jid.2014.194
![]() |
[66] | Hyde MA, Hadley ML, Tristani-Firouzi P, et al. (2012) A randomized trial of the off-label use of imiquimod, 5%, cream with vs without tazarotene, 0.1%, gel for the treatment of lentigo maligna, followed by conservative staged excisions. Arch Derm 148: 592-596. |
[67] |
Singh M, Khong H, Dai Z, et al. (2014) Effective innate and adaptive antimelanoma immunity through localized TLR7/8 activation. J Immunol 193: 4722-4731. doi: 10.4049/jimmunol.1401160
![]() |
[68] | Andtbacka RHI, Collichio FA, Amatruda T, et al. (2013) OPTiM: A randomized phase III trial of talimogene laherparepvec (T-VEC) versus subcutaneous (SC) granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor (GM-CSF) for the treatment (tx) of unresected stage IIIB/C and IV melanoma. J Clin Onc 31. |
[69] |
Andtbacka RHI, Curti BD, Kaufman H, et al. (2014) CALM study: A phase II study of an intratumorally delivered oncolytic immunotherapeutic agent, coxsackievirus A21, in patients with stage IIIc and stage IV malignant melanoma. J Clin Onc 32:5s. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2013.49.4757
![]() |
[70] |
Zamarin D, Holmgaard RB, Subudhi SK, et al. (2014) Potentiation of immune checkpoint blockade cancer immunotherapy with oncolytic virus. J Clin Onc 32:5s. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2013.49.4757
![]() |
[71] | Schipper H, Alla V, Meier C, et al. (2014) Eradication of metastatic melanoma through cooperative expression of RNA-based HDAC1 inhibitor and p73 by oncolytic adenovirus. Oncotarget 5: 5893-5907. |
[72] |
Jemal A, Bray F, Center MM, et al. (2011) Global cancer statistics. CA Cancer J Clin 61: 69-90. doi: 10.3322/caac.20107
![]() |
[73] |
74. Kono K, Mizukami Y, Daigo Y, et al. (2009) Vaccination with multiple peptides derived from novel cancer-testis antigens can induce specific T-cell responses and clinical responses in advanced esophageal cancer. Cancer Sci 100: 1502-1509. doi: 10.1111/j.1349-7006.2009.01200.x
![]() |
[74] |
75. Iinuma H, Fukushima R, Inaba T, et al. (2014) Phase I clinical study of multiple epitope peptide vaccine combined with chemoradiation therapy in esophageal cancer patients. J Transl Med 12:84. doi: 10.1186/1479-5876-12-84
![]() |
[75] | 76. Toh U, Yamana H, Sueyoshi S, et al. (2000) Locoregional cellular immunotherapy for patients with advanced esophageal cancer. Clin Cancer Res 6: 4663-4673. |
[76] | 77. Akutsu Y, Qin W, Murakami K, et al. (2014) The effect of stress on efficacy of dendritic cell therapy for esophageal squamous cell carcinoma. J Clin Onc32. |
[77] | 79. Crew KD, Neugut AI (2006) Epidemiology of gastric cancer. World J Gastroenterol 12:354-362. |
[78] |
80. Ohtsu A, Shah MA, Van Cutsem E, et al. (2011) Bevacizumab in combination with chemotherapy as first-line therapy in advanced gastric cancer: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase III study. J Clin Onc 29: 3968-3976. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2011.36.2236
![]() |
[79] |
81. Bang Y-J, Van Cutsem E, Feyereislova A, et al. (2010) Trastuzumab in combination with chemotherapy versus chemotherapy alone for treatment of HER2-positive advanced gastric or gastro-oesophageal junction cancer (ToGA): a phase 3, open-label, randomised controlled trial. Lancet 376: 687-697. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(10)61121-X
![]() |
[80] |
82. Ajani JA, Hecht JR, Ho L, et al. (2006) An open-label, multinational, multicenter study of G17DT vaccination combined with cisplatin and 5-fluorouracil in patients with untreated,advanced gastric or gastroesophageal cancer: the GC4 study. Cancer 106: 1908-1916. doi: 10.1002/cncr.21814
![]() |
[81] | 83. Masuzawa T, Fujiwara Y, Okada K, et al. (2012) Phase I/II study of S-1 plus cisplatin combined with peptide vaccines for human vascular endothelial growth factor receptor 1 and 2 in patients with advanced gastric cancer. Int J Onc 41: 1297-1304. |
[82] |
84. Popiela T, Kulig J, Czupryna A, et al. (2004) Efficiency of adjuvant immunochemotherapy following curative resection in patients with locally advanced gastric cancer. Gastric Cancer 7:240-245. doi: 10.1007/s10120-004-0299-y
![]() |
[83] | 85. Kono K, Takahashi A, Sugai H, et al. (2002) Dendritic cells pulsed with HER-2/neu-derived peptides can induce specific T-cell responses in patients with gastric cancer. Clin Cancer Res 8:3394-3400. |
[84] | 86. Kono K, Takahashi A, Ichihara F, et al. (2002) Prognostic significance of adoptive immunotherapy with tumor-associated lymphocytes in patients with advanced gastric cancer: a randomized trial. Clin Cancer Res 8: 1767-1771. |
[85] |
87. Jiang J-T, Shen Y-P, Wu C-P, et al. (2010) Increasing the frequency of CIK cells adoptive immunotherapy may decrease risk of death in gastric cancer patients. World J Gastroenterol 16:6155-6162. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v16.i48.6155
![]() |
[86] |
88. Shi L, Zhou Q, Wu J, et al. (2012) Efficacy of adjuvant immunotherapy with cytokine-induced killer cells in patients with locally advanced gastric cancer. Cancer Immunol. Immunotherapy 61:2251-2259. doi: 10.1007/s00262-012-1289-2
![]() |
[87] | 89. Jeung H-C, Moon YW, Rha SY, et al. (2008) Phase III trial of adjuvant 5-fluorouracil and adriamycin versus 5-fluorouracil, adriamycin, and polyadenylic-polyuridylic acid (poly A:U) for locally advanced gastric cancer after curative surgery: final results of 15-year follow-up. Ann Onc/ESMO 19: 520-526. |
[88] | 90. Muro K, Bang Y, Shankaran V, et al. (2014) A phase 1b study of pembrolizumab (Pembro|MK-3475) in patients (Pts) with advanced gastric cancer. ESMO 2014 Congress. |
[89] |
91. Diermeier-Daucher S, Ortmann O, Buchholz S, et al. (2012) Trifunctional antibody ertumaxomab. mAbs 4: 614-622. doi: 10.4161/mabs.21003
![]() |
[90] |
92. Haense N, Pauligk C, Marme F, et al. (2014) Interim analysis of a phase I/II open label, dose-escalating study to investigate safety, tolerability, and preliminary efficacy of the trifunctional anti-HER2/neu x anti-CD3 antibody ertumaxomab in patients with HER2/neu expressing solid tumors progressing after standard therapy. J Clin Onc 32:5s. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2013.49.4757
![]() |
[91] |
93. Atanackovic D, Reinhard H, Meyer S, et al. (2013) The trifunctional antibody catumaxomab amplifies and shapes tumor-specific immunity when applied to gastric cancer patients in the adjuvant setting. Hum Vaccines Immunotherapeutics 9: 2533-2542. doi: 10.4161/hv.26065
![]() |
[92] |
94. Heiss MM, Murawa P, Koralewski P, et al. (2010) The trifunctional antibody catumaxomab for the treatment of malignant ascites due to epithelial cancer: Results of a prospective randomized phase II/III trial. Int J Cancer 127: 2209-2221. doi: 10.1002/ijc.25423
![]() |
[93] |
95. Matsueda S (2014) Immunotherapy in gastric cancer. World J Gastroenterol 20: 1657. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v20.i7.1657
![]() |
[94] |
96. Gabitass RF, Annels NE, Stocken DD, et al. (2011) Elevated myeloid-derived suppressor cells in pancreatic, esophageal and gastric cancer are an independent prognostic factor and are associated with significant elevation of the Th2 cytokine interleukin-13. Cancer Immunol Immunother 60: 1419-1430. doi: 10.1007/s00262-011-1028-0
![]() |
[95] |
97. Mundy-Bosse BL, Young GS, Bauer T, et al. (2011) Distinct myeloid suppressor cell subsets correlate with plasma IL-6 and IL-10 and reduced interferon-alpha signaling in CD4+ T cells from patients with GI malignancy. Cancer Immunol Immunother: CII 60: 1269-1279. doi: 10.1007/s00262-011-1029-z
![]() |
[96] | 98. Jaffee E (2014) Cancer Research Institute: Pancreatic Cancer. Available from: http://www.cancerresearch.org/cancer-immunotherapy/impacting-all-cancers/pancreatic-cancer |
[97] | 99. Toomey PG, Vohra NA, Ghansah T, et al. (2013) Immunotherapy for gastrointestinal malignancies. Cancer Control 20: 32-42. |
[98] |
100. Uram JN, Le DT (2013) Current advances in immunotherapy for pancreatic cancer. Curr. Problems Cancer 37: 273-279. doi: 10.1016/j.currproblcancer.2013.10.004
![]() |
[99] | 101. Lepisto AJ, Moser AJ, Zeh H, et al. (2008) A phase I/II study of a MUC1 peptide pulsed autologous dendritic cell vaccine as adjuvant therapy in patients with resected pancreatic and biliary tumors. Cancer Ther. 6: 955-964. |
[100] |
102. Bernhardt SL, Gjertsen MK, Trachsel S, et al. (2006) Telomerase peptide vaccination of patients with non-resectable pancreatic cancer: a dose escalating phase I/II study. Br J Cancer 95:1474-1482. doi: 10.1038/sj.bjc.6603437
![]() |
[101] |
103. Salman B, Zhou D, Jaffee EM, et al. (2013) Vaccine therapy for pancreatic cancer. Oncoimmunology 2: e26662. doi: 10.4161/onci.26662
![]() |
[102] | 104. Middleton GW, Valle JW, Wadsley J, et al. (2013) A phase III randomized trial of chemoimmunotherapy comprising gemcitabine and capecitabine with or without telomerase vaccine GV1001 in patients with locally advanced or metastatic pancreatic cancer. J Clin Onc 31. |
[103] |
105. Asahara S, Takeda K, Yamao K, et al. (2013) Phase I/II clinical trial using HLA-A24-restricted peptide vaccine derived from KIF20A for patients with advanced pancreatic cancer. J Transl Med 11: 291. doi: 10.1186/1479-5876-11-291
![]() |
[104] |
106. Gjertsen MK, Buanes T, Rosseland AR, et al. (2001) Intradermal ras peptide vaccination with granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor as adjuvant: Clinical and immunological responses in patients with pancreatic adenocarcinoma. Int J Cancer 92: 441-450. doi: 10.1002/ijc.1205
![]() |
[105] |
107. Wedén S, Klemp M, Gladhaug IP, et al. (2011) Long-term follow-up of patients with resected pancreatic cancer following vaccination against mutant K-ras. Int J Cancer 128: 1120-1128. doi: 10.1002/ijc.25449
![]() |
[106] | 108. Jaffee EM, Hruban RH, Biedrzycki B, et al. (2001) Novel allogeneic granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor-secreting tumor vaccine for pancreatic cancer: a phase I trial of safety and immune activation. J Clin Onc 19: 145-156. |
[107] |
109. Lutz E, Yeo CJ, Lillemoe KD, et al. (2011) A Lethally Irradiated Allogeneic Granulocyte-Macrophage Colony Stimulating Factor-Secreting Tumor Vaccine for Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma: A Phase II Trial of Safety, Efficacy, and Immune Activation. Ann Surg 253:328-335. doi: 10.1097/SLA.0b013e3181fd271c
![]() |
[108] | 110. Le DT, Wang-Gillam A, Picozzi V, et al. (2014) A phase 2, randomized trial of GVAX pancreas and CRS-207 immunotherapy versus GVAX alone in patients with metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma: Updated results. J Clin Onc 32. |
[109] |
111. Rossi GR, Lima CMSR, Hardacre JM, et al. (2014) Correlation of anti-calreticulin antibody titers with improved overall survival in a phase 2 clinical trial of algenpantucel-L immunotherapy for patients with resected pancreatic cancer. J Clin Onc 32:5s. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2013.49.4757
![]() |
[110] | 112. Starodub A, Ocean AJ, Messersmith WA, et al. (2015) Phase I/II trial of IMMU-132 (isactuzumab govitecan), an anti-Trop-2-SN-38 antibody drug conjugate (ADC): Results in patients with metastatic gastrointestinal (GI) cancers. J Clin Onc 33. |
[111] | 113. Kondo H, Hazama S, Kawaoka T, et al. (2008) Adoptive immunotherapy for pancreatic cancer using MUC1 peptide-pulsed dendritic cells and activated T lymphocytes. Anticancer Res 28:379-387. |
[112] |
114. Chung MJ, Park JY, Bang S, et al. (2014) Phase II clinical trial of ex vivo-expanded cytokine-induced killer cells therapy in advanced pancreatic cancer. Cancer Immunol Immunother 63: 939-946. doi: 10.1007/s00262-014-1566-3
![]() |
[113] |
115. Royal RE, Levy C, Turner K, et al. (2010) Phase 2 trial of single agent Ipilimumab (anti-CTLA-4) for locally advanced or metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma. J Immunotherapy (Hagerstown, Md: 1997) 33: 828-833. doi: 10.1097/CJI.0b013e3181eec14c
![]() |
[114] | 116. Le DT, Lutz E, Uram JN, et al. (2013) Evaluation of ipilimumab in combination with allogeneic pancreatic tumor cells transfected with a GM-CSF gene in previously treated pancreatic cancer. J Immunotherapy (Hagerstown, Md: 1997) 36: 382-389. |
[115] |
117. Beatty GL, Chiorean EG, Fishman MP, et al. (2011) CD40 agonists alter tumor stroma and show efficacy against pancreatic carcinoma in mice and humans. Science 331: 1612-1616. doi: 10.1126/science.1198443
![]() |
[116] |
118. Pernot S, Terme M, Voron T, et al. (2014) Colorectal cancer and immunity: what we know and perspectives. World J Gastroenterol 20: 3738-3750. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v20.i14.3738
![]() |
[117] |
120. Staff C, Mozaffari F, Haller BK, et al. (2011) A Phase I safety study of plasmid DNA immunization targeting carcinoembryonic antigen in colorectal cancer patients. Vaccine 29:6817-6822. doi: 10.1016/j.vaccine.2010.12.063
![]() |
[118] |
121. Albanopoulos K, Armakolas A, Konstadoulakis MM, et al. (2000) Prognostic significance of circulating antibodies against carcinoembryonic antigen (anti-CEA) in patients with colon cancer. Am J Gastroenterol 95: 1056-1061. doi: 10.1111/j.1572-0241.2000.01982.x
![]() |
[119] | 122. Conry RM, Allen KO, Lee S, et al. (2000) Human autoantibodies to carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) induced by a vaccinia-CEA vaccine. Clin Cancer Res 6: 34-41. |
[120] | 123. Loibner H, Eckert H, Eller N (2004) A randomized placebo-controlled phase II study with the cancer vaccine IGN101 in patients with epithelial solid organ tumors (IGN101/2-01). J Clin Oncol 22: 2619. |
[121] |
124. Karanikas V, Thynne G, Mitchell P, et al. (2001) Mannan Mucin-1 Peptide Immunization: Influence of Cyclophosphamide and the Route of Injection. J Immunotherapy 24: 172-183. doi: 10.1097/00002371-200103000-00012
![]() |
[122] | 125. Hazama S, Nakamura Y, Takenouchi H, et al. (2014) A phase I study of combination vaccine treatment of five therapeutic epitope-peptides for metastatic colorectal cancer|safety, immunological response, and clinical outcome. J Transl Med 12: 63. |
[123] | 126. Ibrahim R, Achtar M, Herrin V (2004) Mutant P53 vaccination of patients with advanced cancers generates specific immunological responses. J Clin Oncol 22: 2521. |
[124] |
127. Toubaji A, Achtar M, Provenzano M, et al. (2008) Pilot study of mutant ras peptide-based vaccine as an adjuvant treatment in pancreatic and colorectal cancers. Cancer Immunol Immunother 57: 1413-1420. doi: 10.1007/s00262-008-0477-6
![]() |
[125] | 128. Harris JE, Ryan L, Hoover HC, et al. (2000) Adjuvant active specific immunotherapy for stage II and III colon cancer with an autologous tumor cell vaccine: Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Study E5283. J Clin Onc 18: 148-157. |
[126] |
129. Uyl-de Groot CA, Vermorken JB, Hanna MG, et al. (2005) Immunotherapy with autologous tumor cell-BCG vaccine in patients with colon cancer: a prospective study of medical and economic benefits. Vaccine 23: 2379-2387. doi: 10.1016/j.vaccine.2005.01.015
![]() |
[127] |
130. Schulze T, Kemmner W, Weitz J, et al. (2009) Efficiency of adjuvant active specific immunization with Newcastle disease virus modified tumor cells in colorectal cancer patients following resection of liver metastases: results of a prospective randomized trial. Cancer Immunol Immunother 58: 61-69. doi: 10.1007/s00262-008-0526-1
![]() |
[128] |
131. Parkhurst MR, Yang JC, Langan RC, et al. (2011) T cells targeting carcinoembryonic antigen can mediate regression of metastatic colorectal cancer but induce severe transient colitis. Mol Ther 19: 620-626. doi: 10.1038/mt.2010.272
![]() |
[129] |
132. Chung KY, Gore I, Fong L, et al. (2010) Phase II study of the anti-cytotoxic T-lymphocyte-associated antigen 4 monoclonal antibody, tremelimumab, in patients with refractory metastatic colorectal cancer. J Clin Onc 28: 3485-3490. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2010.28.3994
![]() |
[130] |
133. Brahmer JR, Drake CG, Wollner I, et al. (2010) Phase I study of single-agent anti-programmed death-1 (MDX-1106) in refractory solid tumors: safety, clinical activity, pharmacodynamics, and immunologic correlates. J Clin Onc 28: 3167-3175. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2009.26.7609
![]() |
[131] |
134. Lipson EJ, Sharfman WH, Drake CG, et al. (2013) Durable cancer regression off-treatment and effective reinduction therapy with an anti-PD-1 antibody. Clin Cancer Res 19: 462-468. doi: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-12-2625
![]() |
[132] | 135. Dela Cruz CS, Tanoue LT, Matthay RA (2011) Lung Cancer: Epidemiology, Etiology, and Prevention. Clin Chest Med 32. |
[133] |
136. Quoix E, Sequist L, Nemunaitis J, et al. (2014) TG4010 immunotherapy combined with first-line therapy in advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC): phase IIb results of the TIME study. J Immunother Cancer 2: O12. doi: 10.1186/2051-1426-2-S3-O12
![]() |
[134] |
137. Lynch TJ, Bondarenko I, Luft A, et al. (2012) Ipilimumab in combination with paclitaxel and carboplatin as first-line treatment in stage IIIB/IV non-small-cell lung cancer: results from a randomized, double-blind, multicenter phase II study. J Clin Onc 30: 2046-2054. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2011.38.4032
![]() |
[135] |
138. Brahmer JR, Horn L, Gandhi L, et al. (2014) Nivolumab (anti-PD-1, BMS-936558, ONO-4538) in patients (pts) with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC): Survival and clinical activity by subgroup analysis. J Clin Onc 32: 5s. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2013.49.4757
![]() |
[136] |
139. Topalian SL, Hodi FS, Brahmer JR, et al. (2012) Safety, activity, and immune correlates of anti-PD-1 antibody in cancer. N Engl J Med 366: 2443-2454. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1200690
![]() |
[137] | 140. Garon EB, Gandhi L, Rizvi N, et al. (2014) Lba43antitumor Activity of Pembrolizumab (pembro|Mk-3475) and Correlation with Programmed Death Ligand 1 (pd-L1) Expression in a Pooled Analysis of Patients (pts) with Advanced Non–Small Cell Lung Carcinoma (nsclc). Ann Onc 25: mdu438. |
[138] |
141. Johnson DB, Rioth MJ, Horn L (2014) Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors in NSCLC. Curr Treat Options Onc 15: 658-669. doi: 10.1007/s11864-014-0305-5
![]() |
[139] | 142. Spigel DR, Gettinger SN, Horn L, et al. (2013) Clinical activity, safety, and biomarkers of MPDL3280A, an engineered PD-L1 antibody in patients with locally advanced or metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). J Clin Onc 31. |
[140] |
143. Brahmer JR, Rizvi NA, Lutzky J, et al. (2014) Clinical activity and biomarkers of MEDI4736, an anti-PD-L1 antibody, in patients with NSCLC. J Clin Onc 32:5s. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2013.49.4757
![]() |
[141] | 144. Antonia SJ, Gettinger SN, Chow LQM, et al. (2014) Nivolumab (anti-PD-1|BMS-936558, ONO-4538) and ipilimumab in first-line NSCLC: Interim phase I results. J Clin Onc 32:5s. |
1. | Kathleen G. Dobson, Simone N. Vigod, Cameron Mustard, Peter M. Smith, Parallel latent trajectories of mental health and personal earnings among 16- to 20 year-old US labor force participants: a 20-year longitudinal study, 2022, 0933-7954, 10.1007/s00127-022-02398-5 | |
2. | Michael William Flores, Amanda Sharp, Margo Moyer, Vicki Fung, Merrill R. Rotter, Benjamin Lê Cook, Criminal Legal Involvement Among U.S. Adults With Serious Psychological Distress and Differences by Race-Ethnicity, 2023, 1075-2730, 10.1176/appi.ps.202200048 | |
3. | Kriya Patel, Bruce Herdman, Kathleen Brown, Preventing Interruptions in Health Care After Release From Jail, 2022, 28, 1078-3458, 215, 10.1089/jchc.20.12.0119 |
aIndicates significant differences bIndicates non-weighted data c indicates weighted proportions data | ||||||
Covariates | Inc. Exp. | No Inc. Exp. | p-value | |||
n b | % c | n b | % c | α = 0.05 | ||
Age | < 0.0001 a | |||||
23-25 | 180 | 34.73 | 2948 | 41.23 | ||
26-29 | 318 | 65.27 | 4044 | 58.77 | ||
Gender | < 0.0001 a | |||||
Male | 405 | 79.85 | 3362 | 49.36 | ||
Female | 93 | 20.15 | 3630 | 50.64 | ||
Race and Ethnicity | < 0.0001 a | |||||
White | 205 | 61.01 | 3592 | 71.06 | ||
Black | 173 | 22.88 | 1853 | 14.92 | ||
Hispanic | 115 | 14.67 | 1480 | 12.73 | ||
Mixed | 5 | 1.44 | 67 | 1.29 | ||
Education | < 0.0001 a | |||||
< High School | 288 | 55.34 | 1298 | 16.21 | ||
= High School | 118 | 26.51 | 1807 | 25.06 | ||
> High School | 86 | 18.16 | 3822 | 58.73 | ||
Income | < 0.0001 a | |||||
< 20,000 | 175 | 30.93 | 703 | 14.85 | ||
20,000-34,999 | 77 | 16.48 | 986 | 13.93 | ||
35,000-54,999 | 73 | 16.50 | 1221 | 17.56 | ||
55,000-74,999 | 38 | 8.79 | 886 | 8.79 | ||
75,000+ | 48 | 10.89 | 1713 | 26.68 | ||
Unknown | 87 | 16.40 | 978 | 13.75 | ||
Marital Status | < 0.0001 a | |||||
Never Married | 390 | 75.98 | 4638 | 63.59 | ||
Married | 66 | 14.74 | 1960 | 30.68 | ||
Separated | 9 | 1.65 | 77 | 1.07 | ||
Divorced | 30 | 7.34 | 295 | 4.61 | ||
Widowed | 1 | 0.29 | 4 | 0.05 | ||
Household Size | < 0.0001 a | |||||
1 | 98 | 17.37 | 814 | 12.08 | ||
2 | 101 | 20.53 | 1886 | 29.72 | ||
3 | 117 | 24.70 | 1719 | 25.30 | ||
4 | 88 | 19.01 | 1302 | 17.82 | ||
5 or more | 94 | 18.40 | 1270 | 15.08 | ||
Place of Residence | < 0.0001 a | |||||
Rural | 108 | 25.29 | 1212 | 19.45 | ||
Urban | 375 | 71.99 | 5390 | 74.77 | ||
Unknown | 15 | 2.72 | 390 | 5.78 | ||
Region of Residence in United States | < 0.0001 a | |||||
West | 107 | 20.81 | 1581 | 21.92 | ||
South | 217 | 40.21 | 2802 | 36.68 | ||
Northeast | 52 | 11.60 | 1110 | 16.62 | ||
North Central | 118 | 26.95 | 1446 | 24.01 | ||
Unknown | 4 | 0.43 | 53 | 0.78 | ||
Health Factors | ||||||
Alcohol Usage Before and During Work | < 0.0001 a | |||||
None | 429 | 87.40 | 6432 | 93.14 | ||
User | 69 | 12.60 | 560 | 6.86 | ||
Smoke Cigarettes | < 0.0001 a | |||||
Non-Smoker | 193 | 34.91 | 4690 | 65.03 | ||
Smoker | 305 | 65.09 | 2302 | 34.97 | ||
Marijuana Usage | < 0.0001 a | |||||
None | 379 | 76.28 | 6088 | 86.53 | ||
User | 119 | 23.72 | 904 | 13.47 | ||
General Health | < 0.0001 a | |||||
Good and Above | 428 | 85.48 | 6382 | 92.25 | ||
Fair/Poor | 70 | 14.52 | 606 | 7.75 | ||
Life Satisfaction Score (1 = Least Satisfied) | < 0.0001 a | |||||
1-5 | 146 | 29.84 | 905 | 12.32 | ||
6-7 | 133 | 28.80 | 1793 | 25.49 | ||
8-9 | 136 | 27.59 | 3076 | 46.17 | ||
10 | 80 | 13.77 | 1205 | 16.02 | ||
Chronic Disease | < 0.0001 a | |||||
None | 461 | 93.37 | 6634 | 94.92 | ||
One or More | 37 | 6.63 | 355 | 5.08 | ||
Check-up during the past year | < 0.0001 a | |||||
No | 325 | 69.57 | 3294 | 49.09 | ||
Yes | 173 | 30.43 | 3687 | 50.91 | ||
Received Treatment in Past Year when ill or injured | < 0.0001 a | |||||
None | 351 | 68.41 | 4436 | 61.43 | ||
1 time | 77 | 17.08 | 1304 | 19.15 | ||
2 times | 28 | 4.98 | 622 | 9.56 | ||
3 times | 18 | 3.98 | 266 | 4.31 | ||
4 or more times | 22 | 5.56 | 353 | 5.56 | ||
Received No Treatment in Past Year when ill or injured | < 0.0001 a | |||||
None | 344 | 67.27 | 4158 | 58.09 | ||
1 time | 51 | 10.36 | 975 | 14.06 | ||
2 times | 49 | 11.51 | 868 | 13.08 | ||
3 times | 25 | 5.77 | 461 | 6.92 | ||
4 or more times | 24 | 5.09 | 502 | 7.85 | ||
Variables of Interest | ||||||
Health Insurance Coverage Type by Year | < 0.0001 a | |||||
Full-Year | Private | 71 | 16.85 | 3463 | 53.52 | ||
Full-Year | Government | 59 | 11.13 | 675 | 7.84 | ||
Partial-Year | Private | 15 | 3.58 | 510 | 7.85 | ||
Partial-Year | Government | 11 | 1.98 | 152 | 2.02 | ||
Partial-Year | Unknown | 48 | 9.31 | 597 | 8.28 | ||
Full-Year | Uninsured | 293 | 57.15 | 1582 | 20.48 | ||
Psychological Health | < 0.0001 a | |||||
Distressed | 95 | 20.73 | 738 | 10.72 | ||
Normal | 380 | 79.27 | 5915 | 89.28 |
aIndicates significant differences bIndicates non-weighted data c indicates weighted proportions data | ||||||
Table2. . | ||||||
Covariates | (PD) Psyc. Distress | Normal Mental Health | p-value | |||
n b | % c | n b | % c | α = 0.05 | ||
All | 833 | 11.34 | 6,295 | 88.66 | n/a | |
Gender | < 0.0001 a | |||||
Male | 346 | 42.71 | 3,212 | 51.97 | ||
Female | 487 | 57.29 | 3,083 | 48.03 | ||
Age | < 0.0001 a | |||||
23-25 | 363 | 42.18 | 2,621 | 40.74 | ||
26-29 | 470 | 57.82 | 3,674 | 59.26 | ||
Race and Ethnicity | < 0.0001 a | |||||
White | 395 | 67.71 | 3,294 | 71.72 | ||
Black | 248 | 17.93 | 1,625 | 14.46 | ||
Hispanic | 181 | 12.95 | 1,315 | 12.52 | ||
Mixed | 9 | 1.41 | 61 | 1.30 | ||
Education | < 0.0001 a | |||||
< High School | 266 | 30.29 | 1,206 | 16.77 | ||
= High School | 233 | 28.45 | 1,581 | 24.34 | ||
> High School | 325 | 41.26 | 3,454 | 58.89 | ||
Income | < 0.0001 a | |||||
< 20,000 | 209 | 22.44 | 1,086 | 14.68 | ||
20,000-34,999 | 121 | 14.77 | 902 | 14.11 | ||
35,000-54,999 | 129 | 16.35 | 1,119 | 17.90 | ||
55,000-74,999 | 88 | 10.35 | 805 | 13.50 | ||
75,000+ | 156 | 20.90 | 1,551 | 26.73 | ||
Unknown | 130 | 15.19 | 832 | 13.07 | ||
Marital Status | < 0.0001 a | |||||
Never Married | 594 | 68.61 | 4,163 | 63.38 | ||
Married | 171 | 22.07 | 1,791 | 31.17 | ||
Separated | 21 | 2.81 | 62 | 0.89 | ||
Divorced | 44 | 6.32 | 260 | 4.51 | ||
Widowed | 1 | 0.19 | 4 | 0.06 | ||
Household Size | < 0.0001 a | |||||
1 | 111 | 13.32 | 764 | 12.34 | ||
2 | 189 | 25.12 | 1,712 | 29.84 | ||
3 | 187 | 22.15 | 1,548 | 25.53 | ||
4 | 149 | 17.55 | 1,173 | 17.91 | ||
5 or more | 197 | 21.86 | 1,097 | 14.38 | ||
Place of Residence | < 0.0001 a | |||||
Rural | 138 | 18.49 | 1,116 | 19.94 | ||
Urban | 661 | 77.47 | 4,815 | 74.11 | ||
Unknown | 34 | 4.04 | 364 | 5.96 | ||
Region of Residence in United States | < 0.0001 a | |||||
West | 169 | 19.39 | 1,440 | 22.22 | ||
South | 348 | 39.18 | 2,507 | 36.32 | ||
Northeast | 133 | 16.66 | 970 | 16.24 | ||
North Central | 178 | 24.33 | 1,327 | 24.41 | ||
Unknown | 5 | 0.44 | 51 | 0.81 | ||
Health Factors | ||||||
Alcohol Usage Before and During Work | < 0.0001 a | |||||
None | 737 | 89.66 | 5,813 | 93.48 | ||
User | 96 | 10.34 | 482 | 6.52 | ||
Smoke Cigarettes | < 0.0001 a | |||||
Non-Smoker | 422 | 48.07 | 4,191 | 64.70 | ||
Smoker | 411 | 51.93 | 2,104 | 35.30 | ||
Marijuana Usage | < 0.0001 a | |||||
None | 647 | 77.69 | 5,495 | 86.80 | ||
User | 186 | 22.31 | 800 | 13.20 | ||
General Health | < 0.0001 a | |||||
Good and Above | 654 | 78.97 | 5,851 | 93.76 | ||
Fair/Poor | 178 | 21.03 | 443 | 6.24 | ||
Life Satisfaction Score (1 = Least Satisfied) | < 0.0001 a | |||||
1-5 | 373 | 46.65 | 620 | 9.03 | ||
6-7 | 255 | 29.75 | 1,562 | 24.90 | ||
8-9 | 140 | 17.71 | 2,965 | 49.20 | ||
10 | 61 | 5.88 | 1,142 | 16.88 | ||
Chronic Disease | < 0.0001 a | |||||
None | 794 | 95.72 | 5,964 | 94.84 | ||
One or More | 38 | 4.28 | 330 | 5.16 | ||
Check-up during the past year | < 0.0001 a | |||||
No | 407 | 50.55 | 3,033 | 50.26 | ||
Yes | 425 | 49.45 | 3,255 | 49.74 | ||
Received Treatment in Past Year when ill or injured | < 0.0001 a | |||||
None | 445 | 50.57 | 4,088 | 62.96 | ||
1 time | 153 | 19.18 | 1,176 | 19.16 | ||
2 times | 91 | 11.39 | 541 | 9.24 | ||
3 times | 39 | 5.20 | 228 | 4.10 | ||
4 or more times | 101 | 13.67 | 256 | 4.54 | ||
Received No Treatment in Past Year when ill or injured | < 0.0001 a | |||||
None | 458 | 53.25 | 3,800 | 58.94 | ||
1 time | 103 | 11.96 | 885 | 14.17 | ||
2 times | 96 | 13.06 | 785 | 13.11 | ||
3 times | 63 | 7.67 | 412 | 6.89 | ||
4 or more times | 105 | 14.07 | 397 | 6.89 | ||
Variables of Interest | ||||||
Health Insurance Coverage Type by Year | < 0.0001 a | |||||
Full-Year | Private | 261 | 34.61 | 3,153 | 54.08 | ||
Full-Year | Government | 142 | 15.55 | 543 | 6.93 | ||
Partial-Year | Private | 49 | 6.48 | 455 | 7.77 | ||
Partial-Year | Government | 32 | 3.30 | 117 | 1.76 | ||
Partial-Year | Unknown | 100 | 11.94 | 518 | 7.88 | ||
Full-Year | Uninsured | 248 | 28.12 | 1,501 | 21.58 | ||
Incarceration Experience | < 0.0001 a | |||||
Yes | 95 | 11.34 | 380 | 5.55 | ||
No | 738 | 88.66 | 5,915 | 94.45 |
aIndicates significant differences ** Demographic variables include age, gender, race/ethnicity, education, and income. *** Andersen Model covariates includes age, gender, race/ethnicity, education, income, health insurance status, marital status, household size, place of residence, U.S. region, usage of alcohol during school or work, tobacco usage, marijuana usage, chronic disease, receiving treatment when ill or injured, not receiving treatment when ill or injured, and life satisfaction. | ||
Model (referent = no incarceration experience) | OR | 95% CI |
Model 1 Formerly Incarcerated | ||
Yes | 2.18 | (1.68-2.83) a |
No | 1.00 | Referent |
Model 2 Incarceration Experience x Health Insurance Status | ||
Formerly Incarcerated | ||
Yes | 1.73 | (1.31-2.28) a |
No | 1.00 | Referent |
Health Insurance Status | ||
Full-Year | Private | 1.00 | Referent |
Full-Year | Government | 3.37 | (2.62-4.33) a |
Partial-Year | Private | 1.29 | (0.92-1.83) |
Partial-Year | Government | 2.86 | (1.79-4.57) a |
Partial-Year | Unknown | 2.30 | (1.75-3.03) a |
Full-Year | Uninsured | 1.86 | (1.51-2.30) a |
Model 3 Incarceration Experience x Health Insurance x Demographics** | ||
Formerly Incarcerated | ||
Yes | 1.70 | (1.27-2.27) a |
No | 1.00 | Referent |
Health Insurance Status | ||
Full-Year | Private | 1.00 | Referent |
Full-Year | Government | 2.24 | (1.67-3.02) a |
Partial-Year | Private | 1.21 | (0.85-1.73) |
Partial-Year | Government | 1.84 | (1.09-3.13) a |
Partial-Year | Unknown | 1.99 | (1.49-2.66) a |
Full-Year | Uninsured | 1.54 | (1.21-1.95) a |
Significant Demographic Covariates | ||
Gender | ||
Female | 1.54 | (1.29-1.84) a |
Male | 1.00 | Referent |
Education | ||
< High School | 1.26 | (1.01-1.58) a |
= High School | 1.00 | Referent |
> High School | 0.69 | (0.56-0.86) a |
Model 4 Incarceration Experience x Health Insurance x Andersen Model Covariates*** | ||
Formerly Incarcerated | ||
Yes | 1.30 | (0.94-1.80) |
No | 1.00 | Referent |
Health Insurance Status | ||
Full-Year | Private | 1.00 | Referent |
Full-Year | Government | 1.32 | (0.94-1.85) |
Partial-Year | Private | 1.00 | (0.68-1.47) |
Partial-Year | Government | 0.83 | (0.44-1.59) |
Partial-Year | Unknown | 1.33 | (0.96-1.84) |
Full-Year | Uninsured | 1.01 | (0.77-1.33) |
Significant Andersen Covariates | ||
Gender | ||
Female | 1.50 | (1.23-1.85) a |
Male | 1.00 | Referent |
Marijuana Usage | ||
Yes | 1.34 | (1.06-1.70) a |
No | ||
General Health | ||
Good and Above | 1.00 | Referent |
Fair/Poor | 1.54 | (1.17-2.03) a |
Received Treatment in Past Year when ill or injured | ||
None | 1.00 | Referent |
1 time | 1.15 | (0.90-1.47) |
2 times | 1.24 | (0.91-1.69) |
3 times | 1.08 | (0.68-1.72) |
4 or more times | 1.79 | (1.25-2.56) a |
Life Satisfaction Score (1 = Least Satisfied) | ||
1-5 | 12.45 | (8.62-18.25) a |
6-7 | 3.36 | (2.34-4.83) a |
8-9 | 1.18 | (0.81-1.72) |
10 | 1.00 | Referent |
aIndicates significant differences bIndicates non-weighted data c indicates weighted proportions data | ||||||
Covariates | Inc. Exp. | No Inc. Exp. | p-value | |||
n b | % c | n b | % c | α = 0.05 | ||
Age | < 0.0001 a | |||||
23-25 | 180 | 34.73 | 2948 | 41.23 | ||
26-29 | 318 | 65.27 | 4044 | 58.77 | ||
Gender | < 0.0001 a | |||||
Male | 405 | 79.85 | 3362 | 49.36 | ||
Female | 93 | 20.15 | 3630 | 50.64 | ||
Race and Ethnicity | < 0.0001 a | |||||
White | 205 | 61.01 | 3592 | 71.06 | ||
Black | 173 | 22.88 | 1853 | 14.92 | ||
Hispanic | 115 | 14.67 | 1480 | 12.73 | ||
Mixed | 5 | 1.44 | 67 | 1.29 | ||
Education | < 0.0001 a | |||||
< High School | 288 | 55.34 | 1298 | 16.21 | ||
= High School | 118 | 26.51 | 1807 | 25.06 | ||
> High School | 86 | 18.16 | 3822 | 58.73 | ||
Income | < 0.0001 a | |||||
< 20,000 | 175 | 30.93 | 703 | 14.85 | ||
20,000-34,999 | 77 | 16.48 | 986 | 13.93 | ||
35,000-54,999 | 73 | 16.50 | 1221 | 17.56 | ||
55,000-74,999 | 38 | 8.79 | 886 | 8.79 | ||
75,000+ | 48 | 10.89 | 1713 | 26.68 | ||
Unknown | 87 | 16.40 | 978 | 13.75 | ||
Marital Status | < 0.0001 a | |||||
Never Married | 390 | 75.98 | 4638 | 63.59 | ||
Married | 66 | 14.74 | 1960 | 30.68 | ||
Separated | 9 | 1.65 | 77 | 1.07 | ||
Divorced | 30 | 7.34 | 295 | 4.61 | ||
Widowed | 1 | 0.29 | 4 | 0.05 | ||
Household Size | < 0.0001 a | |||||
1 | 98 | 17.37 | 814 | 12.08 | ||
2 | 101 | 20.53 | 1886 | 29.72 | ||
3 | 117 | 24.70 | 1719 | 25.30 | ||
4 | 88 | 19.01 | 1302 | 17.82 | ||
5 or more | 94 | 18.40 | 1270 | 15.08 | ||
Place of Residence | < 0.0001 a | |||||
Rural | 108 | 25.29 | 1212 | 19.45 | ||
Urban | 375 | 71.99 | 5390 | 74.77 | ||
Unknown | 15 | 2.72 | 390 | 5.78 | ||
Region of Residence in United States | < 0.0001 a | |||||
West | 107 | 20.81 | 1581 | 21.92 | ||
South | 217 | 40.21 | 2802 | 36.68 | ||
Northeast | 52 | 11.60 | 1110 | 16.62 | ||
North Central | 118 | 26.95 | 1446 | 24.01 | ||
Unknown | 4 | 0.43 | 53 | 0.78 | ||
Health Factors | ||||||
Alcohol Usage Before and During Work | < 0.0001 a | |||||
None | 429 | 87.40 | 6432 | 93.14 | ||
User | 69 | 12.60 | 560 | 6.86 | ||
Smoke Cigarettes | < 0.0001 a | |||||
Non-Smoker | 193 | 34.91 | 4690 | 65.03 | ||
Smoker | 305 | 65.09 | 2302 | 34.97 | ||
Marijuana Usage | < 0.0001 a | |||||
None | 379 | 76.28 | 6088 | 86.53 | ||
User | 119 | 23.72 | 904 | 13.47 | ||
General Health | < 0.0001 a | |||||
Good and Above | 428 | 85.48 | 6382 | 92.25 | ||
Fair/Poor | 70 | 14.52 | 606 | 7.75 | ||
Life Satisfaction Score (1 = Least Satisfied) | < 0.0001 a | |||||
1-5 | 146 | 29.84 | 905 | 12.32 | ||
6-7 | 133 | 28.80 | 1793 | 25.49 | ||
8-9 | 136 | 27.59 | 3076 | 46.17 | ||
10 | 80 | 13.77 | 1205 | 16.02 | ||
Chronic Disease | < 0.0001 a | |||||
None | 461 | 93.37 | 6634 | 94.92 | ||
One or More | 37 | 6.63 | 355 | 5.08 | ||
Check-up during the past year | < 0.0001 a | |||||
No | 325 | 69.57 | 3294 | 49.09 | ||
Yes | 173 | 30.43 | 3687 | 50.91 | ||
Received Treatment in Past Year when ill or injured | < 0.0001 a | |||||
None | 351 | 68.41 | 4436 | 61.43 | ||
1 time | 77 | 17.08 | 1304 | 19.15 | ||
2 times | 28 | 4.98 | 622 | 9.56 | ||
3 times | 18 | 3.98 | 266 | 4.31 | ||
4 or more times | 22 | 5.56 | 353 | 5.56 | ||
Received No Treatment in Past Year when ill or injured | < 0.0001 a | |||||
None | 344 | 67.27 | 4158 | 58.09 | ||
1 time | 51 | 10.36 | 975 | 14.06 | ||
2 times | 49 | 11.51 | 868 | 13.08 | ||
3 times | 25 | 5.77 | 461 | 6.92 | ||
4 or more times | 24 | 5.09 | 502 | 7.85 | ||
Variables of Interest | ||||||
Health Insurance Coverage Type by Year | < 0.0001 a | |||||
Full-Year | Private | 71 | 16.85 | 3463 | 53.52 | ||
Full-Year | Government | 59 | 11.13 | 675 | 7.84 | ||
Partial-Year | Private | 15 | 3.58 | 510 | 7.85 | ||
Partial-Year | Government | 11 | 1.98 | 152 | 2.02 | ||
Partial-Year | Unknown | 48 | 9.31 | 597 | 8.28 | ||
Full-Year | Uninsured | 293 | 57.15 | 1582 | 20.48 | ||
Psychological Health | < 0.0001 a | |||||
Distressed | 95 | 20.73 | 738 | 10.72 | ||
Normal | 380 | 79.27 | 5915 | 89.28 |
aIndicates significant differences bIndicates non-weighted data c indicates weighted proportions data | ||||||
Table2. . | ||||||
Covariates | (PD) Psyc. Distress | Normal Mental Health | p-value | |||
n b | % c | n b | % c | α = 0.05 | ||
All | 833 | 11.34 | 6,295 | 88.66 | n/a | |
Gender | < 0.0001 a | |||||
Male | 346 | 42.71 | 3,212 | 51.97 | ||
Female | 487 | 57.29 | 3,083 | 48.03 | ||
Age | < 0.0001 a | |||||
23-25 | 363 | 42.18 | 2,621 | 40.74 | ||
26-29 | 470 | 57.82 | 3,674 | 59.26 | ||
Race and Ethnicity | < 0.0001 a | |||||
White | 395 | 67.71 | 3,294 | 71.72 | ||
Black | 248 | 17.93 | 1,625 | 14.46 | ||
Hispanic | 181 | 12.95 | 1,315 | 12.52 | ||
Mixed | 9 | 1.41 | 61 | 1.30 | ||
Education | < 0.0001 a | |||||
< High School | 266 | 30.29 | 1,206 | 16.77 | ||
= High School | 233 | 28.45 | 1,581 | 24.34 | ||
> High School | 325 | 41.26 | 3,454 | 58.89 | ||
Income | < 0.0001 a | |||||
< 20,000 | 209 | 22.44 | 1,086 | 14.68 | ||
20,000-34,999 | 121 | 14.77 | 902 | 14.11 | ||
35,000-54,999 | 129 | 16.35 | 1,119 | 17.90 | ||
55,000-74,999 | 88 | 10.35 | 805 | 13.50 | ||
75,000+ | 156 | 20.90 | 1,551 | 26.73 | ||
Unknown | 130 | 15.19 | 832 | 13.07 | ||
Marital Status | < 0.0001 a | |||||
Never Married | 594 | 68.61 | 4,163 | 63.38 | ||
Married | 171 | 22.07 | 1,791 | 31.17 | ||
Separated | 21 | 2.81 | 62 | 0.89 | ||
Divorced | 44 | 6.32 | 260 | 4.51 | ||
Widowed | 1 | 0.19 | 4 | 0.06 | ||
Household Size | < 0.0001 a | |||||
1 | 111 | 13.32 | 764 | 12.34 | ||
2 | 189 | 25.12 | 1,712 | 29.84 | ||
3 | 187 | 22.15 | 1,548 | 25.53 | ||
4 | 149 | 17.55 | 1,173 | 17.91 | ||
5 or more | 197 | 21.86 | 1,097 | 14.38 | ||
Place of Residence | < 0.0001 a | |||||
Rural | 138 | 18.49 | 1,116 | 19.94 | ||
Urban | 661 | 77.47 | 4,815 | 74.11 | ||
Unknown | 34 | 4.04 | 364 | 5.96 | ||
Region of Residence in United States | < 0.0001 a | |||||
West | 169 | 19.39 | 1,440 | 22.22 | ||
South | 348 | 39.18 | 2,507 | 36.32 | ||
Northeast | 133 | 16.66 | 970 | 16.24 | ||
North Central | 178 | 24.33 | 1,327 | 24.41 | ||
Unknown | 5 | 0.44 | 51 | 0.81 | ||
Health Factors | ||||||
Alcohol Usage Before and During Work | < 0.0001 a | |||||
None | 737 | 89.66 | 5,813 | 93.48 | ||
User | 96 | 10.34 | 482 | 6.52 | ||
Smoke Cigarettes | < 0.0001 a | |||||
Non-Smoker | 422 | 48.07 | 4,191 | 64.70 | ||
Smoker | 411 | 51.93 | 2,104 | 35.30 | ||
Marijuana Usage | < 0.0001 a | |||||
None | 647 | 77.69 | 5,495 | 86.80 | ||
User | 186 | 22.31 | 800 | 13.20 | ||
General Health | < 0.0001 a | |||||
Good and Above | 654 | 78.97 | 5,851 | 93.76 | ||
Fair/Poor | 178 | 21.03 | 443 | 6.24 | ||
Life Satisfaction Score (1 = Least Satisfied) | < 0.0001 a | |||||
1-5 | 373 | 46.65 | 620 | 9.03 | ||
6-7 | 255 | 29.75 | 1,562 | 24.90 | ||
8-9 | 140 | 17.71 | 2,965 | 49.20 | ||
10 | 61 | 5.88 | 1,142 | 16.88 | ||
Chronic Disease | < 0.0001 a | |||||
None | 794 | 95.72 | 5,964 | 94.84 | ||
One or More | 38 | 4.28 | 330 | 5.16 | ||
Check-up during the past year | < 0.0001 a | |||||
No | 407 | 50.55 | 3,033 | 50.26 | ||
Yes | 425 | 49.45 | 3,255 | 49.74 | ||
Received Treatment in Past Year when ill or injured | < 0.0001 a | |||||
None | 445 | 50.57 | 4,088 | 62.96 | ||
1 time | 153 | 19.18 | 1,176 | 19.16 | ||
2 times | 91 | 11.39 | 541 | 9.24 | ||
3 times | 39 | 5.20 | 228 | 4.10 | ||
4 or more times | 101 | 13.67 | 256 | 4.54 | ||
Received No Treatment in Past Year when ill or injured | < 0.0001 a | |||||
None | 458 | 53.25 | 3,800 | 58.94 | ||
1 time | 103 | 11.96 | 885 | 14.17 | ||
2 times | 96 | 13.06 | 785 | 13.11 | ||
3 times | 63 | 7.67 | 412 | 6.89 | ||
4 or more times | 105 | 14.07 | 397 | 6.89 | ||
Variables of Interest | ||||||
Health Insurance Coverage Type by Year | < 0.0001 a | |||||
Full-Year | Private | 261 | 34.61 | 3,153 | 54.08 | ||
Full-Year | Government | 142 | 15.55 | 543 | 6.93 | ||
Partial-Year | Private | 49 | 6.48 | 455 | 7.77 | ||
Partial-Year | Government | 32 | 3.30 | 117 | 1.76 | ||
Partial-Year | Unknown | 100 | 11.94 | 518 | 7.88 | ||
Full-Year | Uninsured | 248 | 28.12 | 1,501 | 21.58 | ||
Incarceration Experience | < 0.0001 a | |||||
Yes | 95 | 11.34 | 380 | 5.55 | ||
No | 738 | 88.66 | 5,915 | 94.45 |
aIndicates significant differences ** Demographic variables include age, gender, race/ethnicity, education, and income. *** Andersen Model covariates includes age, gender, race/ethnicity, education, income, health insurance status, marital status, household size, place of residence, U.S. region, usage of alcohol during school or work, tobacco usage, marijuana usage, chronic disease, receiving treatment when ill or injured, not receiving treatment when ill or injured, and life satisfaction. | ||
Model (referent = no incarceration experience) | OR | 95% CI |
Model 1 Formerly Incarcerated | ||
Yes | 2.18 | (1.68-2.83) a |
No | 1.00 | Referent |
Model 2 Incarceration Experience x Health Insurance Status | ||
Formerly Incarcerated | ||
Yes | 1.73 | (1.31-2.28) a |
No | 1.00 | Referent |
Health Insurance Status | ||
Full-Year | Private | 1.00 | Referent |
Full-Year | Government | 3.37 | (2.62-4.33) a |
Partial-Year | Private | 1.29 | (0.92-1.83) |
Partial-Year | Government | 2.86 | (1.79-4.57) a |
Partial-Year | Unknown | 2.30 | (1.75-3.03) a |
Full-Year | Uninsured | 1.86 | (1.51-2.30) a |
Model 3 Incarceration Experience x Health Insurance x Demographics** | ||
Formerly Incarcerated | ||
Yes | 1.70 | (1.27-2.27) a |
No | 1.00 | Referent |
Health Insurance Status | ||
Full-Year | Private | 1.00 | Referent |
Full-Year | Government | 2.24 | (1.67-3.02) a |
Partial-Year | Private | 1.21 | (0.85-1.73) |
Partial-Year | Government | 1.84 | (1.09-3.13) a |
Partial-Year | Unknown | 1.99 | (1.49-2.66) a |
Full-Year | Uninsured | 1.54 | (1.21-1.95) a |
Significant Demographic Covariates | ||
Gender | ||
Female | 1.54 | (1.29-1.84) a |
Male | 1.00 | Referent |
Education | ||
< High School | 1.26 | (1.01-1.58) a |
= High School | 1.00 | Referent |
> High School | 0.69 | (0.56-0.86) a |
Model 4 Incarceration Experience x Health Insurance x Andersen Model Covariates*** | ||
Formerly Incarcerated | ||
Yes | 1.30 | (0.94-1.80) |
No | 1.00 | Referent |
Health Insurance Status | ||
Full-Year | Private | 1.00 | Referent |
Full-Year | Government | 1.32 | (0.94-1.85) |
Partial-Year | Private | 1.00 | (0.68-1.47) |
Partial-Year | Government | 0.83 | (0.44-1.59) |
Partial-Year | Unknown | 1.33 | (0.96-1.84) |
Full-Year | Uninsured | 1.01 | (0.77-1.33) |
Significant Andersen Covariates | ||
Gender | ||
Female | 1.50 | (1.23-1.85) a |
Male | 1.00 | Referent |
Marijuana Usage | ||
Yes | 1.34 | (1.06-1.70) a |
No | ||
General Health | ||
Good and Above | 1.00 | Referent |
Fair/Poor | 1.54 | (1.17-2.03) a |
Received Treatment in Past Year when ill or injured | ||
None | 1.00 | Referent |
1 time | 1.15 | (0.90-1.47) |
2 times | 1.24 | (0.91-1.69) |
3 times | 1.08 | (0.68-1.72) |
4 or more times | 1.79 | (1.25-2.56) a |
Life Satisfaction Score (1 = Least Satisfied) | ||
1-5 | 12.45 | (8.62-18.25) a |
6-7 | 3.36 | (2.34-4.83) a |
8-9 | 1.18 | (0.81-1.72) |
10 | 1.00 | Referent |