Disparities in Stage-Specific Guideline-Concordant Cancer-Directed Treatment for Patients with Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma

Understanding Barriers to Guideline-Concordant Treatment in Foregut Cancer: From Data to Solutions

BACKGROUND

A large proportion of patients with foregut cancers do not receive guideline-concordant treatment (GCT). This study sought to understand underlying barriers to GCT through a root cause analysis approach.

METHODS

A single-institution retrospective review of 498 patients with foregut (gastric, pancreatic, and hepatobiliary) adenocarcinoma from 2018 to 2022 was performed. Guideline-concordant treatment was defined based on National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines. The Ishikawa cause and effect model was used to establish main contributing factors to non-GCT.

RESULTS

Overall, 34% did not receive GCT. Root causes of non-GCT included Patient, Physician, Institutional Environment and Broader System-related factors. In decreasing order of frequency, the following contributed to non-GCT: receipt of incomplete therapy (N = 28, 16.5%), deconditioning on chemotherapy (N = 26, 15.3%), delays in care because of patient resource constraints followed by loss to follow-up (N = 19, 11.2%), physician factors (N = 19, 11.2%), no documentation of treatment plan after referral to oncologic expertise (N = 19, 11.2%), loss to follow-up before oncology referral (N = 17, 10%), nonreferral to medical oncologic expertise (N = 16, 9.4%), nonreferral to surgical oncology in patients with resectable disease (N = 15, 8.8%), and complications preventing completion of treatment (N = 11, 6.5%). Non-GCT often was a function of multiple intersecting patient, physician, and institutional factors.

CONCLUSIONS

A substantial percentage of patients with foregut cancer do not receive GCT. Solutions that may improve receipt of GCT include development of automated systems to improve patient follow-up; institutional prioritization of resources to enhance staffing; financial counseling and assistance programs; and development and integration of structured prehabilitation programs into cancer treatment pathways.

Gender differences in tumor characteristics, treatment allocation and survival in stage I-III pancreatic cancer: a nationwide study

INTRODUCTION

Sex and gender are modulators of health and disease and may have impact on treatment allocation and survival in patients with cancer. In this study, we analyzed the impact of sex and gender on treatment allocation and overall survival in patients with stage I-III pancreatic cancer.

METHODS

Patients with stage I-III pancreatic cancer diagnosed between 2015 and 2020 were selected from the nationwide Netherlands Cancer Registry. Associations between sex and gender and the probability of receiving surgical and/or systemic treatment were examined with multivariable logistic regression analyses. Overall survival was assessed with log rank test and multivariable Cox proportional hazard analysis.

RESULTS

Among 6855 patients, 51.2 % were female. Multivariable logistic regression analyses with adjustment for known confounders (age, performance status, comorbidities, tumor location, tumor stage and previous malignancies) showed that females less often received systemic chemotherapy compared to males (OR 0.799, 95 %CI 0.703-0.909, p < .001). No difference was found in the probability for undergoing surgical resection. Furthermore, females had worse overall survival compared to males (median OS 8.5 and 9.2 months respectively, 95 %CI 8.669-9.731).

CONCLUSION

This nationwide study found that female patients with stage I-III pancreatic cancer significantly less often received systemic treatment and had worse overall survival as compared to males. Disparities in pancreatic cancer care can be decreased by recognizing and resolving potential obstacles or biases in treatment decision-making.

Association between quality metric adherence and overall survival among patients undergoing resection of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma

BACKGROUND

Process-based quality metrics are important for improving long-term outcomes after surgical resection. We sought to develop a practical surgical quality score for patients diagnosed with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma undergoing curative-intent resection.

METHODS

Patients who underwent surgical resection for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma between 2010 and 2017 were identified using the National Cancer Database. Five surgical quality metrics were defined: minimally invasive approach, adequate lymphadenectomy, negative surgical margins, receipt of adjuvant therapy, and no prolonged hospitalization. Log-rank test and multivariable Cox regression analysis were used to determine the association of quality metrics with overall survival.

RESULTS

A total of 38,228 patients underwent curative-intent resection for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma. Median age at diagnosis was 68 years (interquartile range = 61-75), and roughly half the cohort was male (n = 19,562; 51.2%). Quality metrics were achieved on a varied basis: minimally invasive approach (n = 5,701; 14.9%), adequate lymphadenectomy (n = 27,122; 80.0%), negative surgical margin (n = 29,248; 76.5%), receipt of adjuvant therapy (n = 26,006; 68.0%), and absence of prolonged hospitalization (n = 26,470; 69.2%). An integer-based surgical quality score from 0 (no quality metrics) to 16 (all quality metrics) was calculated. Patients with higher scores had progressively better overall survival. Median overall survival differed substantially among the score categories (score = 0-4 points, 8.7 [8.0-9.6] months; 5-8 points, 17.5 [16.9-18.2] months; 9-12 points, 22.1 [21.6-22.8] months; and 13-16 points, 30.8 [30.2-31.3] months; P <  .001). On multivariable analysis, risk-adjusted mortality hazards decreased in a stepwise manner with higher scores (0-4 points: reference; 5-8 points: multivariable adjusted hazard ratio = 0.60; 95% CI, 0.57-0.63; 9-12 points: adjusted hazard ratio = 0.49; 95% CI, 0.47-0.52; 13-16 points: and adjusted hazard ratio = 0.37; 95% CI, 0.34-0.40; all P < .001).

CONCLUSION

Adherence to quality metrics may be associated with improved overall survival. Efforts aimed at increasing compliance with quality metric measures may help optimize long-term outcomes among patients undergoing surgical resection for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma.

Time Kills: Impact of Socioeconomic Deprivation on Timely Access to Guideline-Concordant Treatment in Foregut Cancer

BACKGROUND

Receipt of guideline-concordant treatment (GCT) is associated with improved prognosis in foregut cancers. Studies show that patients living in areas of high neighborhood deprivation have worse healthcare outcomes; however, its effect on GCT in foregut cancers has not been evaluated. We studied the impact of the area deprivation index (ADI) as a barrier to GCT.

STUDY DESIGN

A single-institution retrospective review of 498 foregut cancer patients (gastric, pancreatic, and hepatobiliary adenocarcinoma) from 2018 to 2022 was performed. GCT was defined based on National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines. ADI, a validated measure of neighborhood disadvantage was divided into terciles (low, medium, and high) with high ADI indicating the most disadvantage.

RESULTS

Of 498 patients, 328 (66%) received GCT: 66%, 72%, and 59% in pancreatic, gastric, and hepatobiliary cancers, respectively. Median (interquartile range) time from symptoms to workup was 6 (3 to 13) weeks, from diagnosis to oncology appointment was 4 (1 to 10) weeks, and from oncology appointment to treatment was 4 (2 to 10) weeks. Forty-six percent were diagnosed in the emergency department. On multivariable analyses, age 75 years or older (odds ratio [OR] 0.39 [95% CI 0.18 to 0.87]), Black race (OR 0.52 [95% CI 0.31 to 0.86]), high ADI (OR 0.25 (95% CI 0.14 to 0.48]), 6 weeks or more from symptoms to workup (OR 0.44 [95% CI 0.27 to 0.73]), 4 weeks or more from diagnosis to oncology appointment (OR 0.76 [95% CI 0.46 to 0.93]), and 4 weeks or more from oncology appointment to treatment (OR 0.63 [95% CI 0.36 to 0.98]) were independently associated with nonreceipt of GCT.

CONCLUSIONS

Residence in an area of high deprivation predicts nonreceipt of GCT. This is due to multiple individual- and system-level barriers. Identifying these barriers and developing effective interventions, including community outreach and collaboration, leveraging telehealth, and increasing oncologic expertise in underserved areas, may improve access to GCT.

Association between social determinants of health and delayed postoperative adjuvant therapy among patients undergoing resection of pancreatic cancer

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Pancreatic cancer (PDAC) requires a multimodality approach. We sought to define the association between social determinants of health (SDOH) and delayed or nonreceipt of adjuvant chemotherapy (aCT) among patients undergoing PDAC resection.

METHODS

Data on patients who underwent PDAC resection between 2014 and 2020 were identified from Medicare Standard Analytic Files and merged with the county-level social vulnerability index (SVI). Mediation analysis defined the association between SVI subthemes and aCT receipt.

RESULTS

Among 24 078 patients, 47.7% received timely aCT, 17.7% received delayed aCT, and 34.6% did not receive any aCT. High SVI was associated with delay (odds ratio [OR] 1.22, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.10-1.34) and nonreceipt of aCT (OR 1.30, 95% CI 1.20-1.41) (both p < 0.05). 73.1% of the variation in timely aCT receipt was directly attributable to SVI, whereas 26.9% of the effect was due to indirect mediators including hospital volume (6.4%), length-of-stay (7.9%) and postoperative complications (12.6%). Socioeconomic status (delayed aCT: OR 1.25, 95% CI 1.13-1.38; nonreceipt aCT: OR 1.25, 95% CI 1.15-1.36) and household composition and disability (delayed aCT: OR 1.30, 95% CI 1.17-1.43; nonreceipt aCT: OR 1.19, 95% CI 1.09-1.29) were associated with receipt of aCT (both p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Most of the disparities in receipt of aCT after PDAC surgery are driven by underlying SDOH such as SVI.

Inequity in Cancer and Cancer Care Delivery in the United States

Inequity exists along the continuum of cancer and cancer care delivery in the United States. Marginalized populations have later stage cancer at diagnosis, decreased likelihood of receiving cancer-directed care, and worse outcomes from treatment. These inequities are driven by historical, structural, systemic, interpersonal, and internalized factors that influence cancer across the pathologic and clinical continuum. To ensure equity in cancer care, interventions are needed at the level of policy, care delivery, interpersonal communication, diversity within the clinical workforce, and clinical trial accessibility and design.

Factors associated with not undergoing surgery for locally advanced rectal cancers: An NCDB propensity-matched analysis

BACKGROUND

The traditional treatment paradigm for patients with locally advanced rectal cancers has been neoadjuvant chemoradiation followed by curative intent surgery and adjuvant chemotherapy. This study aimed to assess surgery trends for locally advanced rectal cancers, factors associated with forgoing surgery, and overall survival outcomes.

METHODS

Adults with locally advanced rectal cancers were retrospectively analyzed using the National Cancer Database (2004-2019). Propensity score matching was performed. Factors associated with not undergoing surgery were identified using multivariable logistic regression. Kaplan-Meier and log-rank tests were used for 5-year overall survival analysis, stratified by stage and treatment type.

RESULTS

A total of 72,653 patients were identified, with 64,396 (88.64%) patients undergoing neoadjuvant + surgery ± adjuvant therapy, 579 (0.80%) chemotherapy only, 916 (1.26%) radiation only, and 6,762 (9.31%) chemoradiation only. The proportion of patients who underwent surgery declined over the study period (95.61% in 2006 to 92.29% in 2019, P trend < .001), whereas the proportion of patients who refused surgery increased (1.45%-4.48%, P trend < .001). Factors associated with not undergoing surgery for locally advanced rectal cancers included older age, Black race (odds ratio 1.47, 95% CI 1.35-1.60, P < .001), higher Charlson-Deyo score (score ≥3: 1.79, 1.58-2.04, P < .001), stage II cancer (1.22, 1.17-1.28, P < .001), lower median household income, and non-private insurance. Neoadjuvant + surgery ± adjuvant therapy was associated with the best 5-year overall survival, regardless of stage, in unmatched and matched cohorts.

CONCLUSION

Despite surgery remaining an integral component in the management of locally advanced rectal cancers, there is a concerning decline in guideline-concordant surgical care for rectal cancer in the United States, with evidence of persistent socioeconomic disparities. Providers should seek to understand patient perspectives/barriers and guide them toward surgery if appropriate candidates. Continued standardization, implementation, and evaluation of rectal cancer care through national accreditation programs are necessary to ensure that all patients receive optimal treatment.

Impact of Adherence to Operative Standards and Stage-Specific Guideline-Recommended Therapy in Nonmetastatic Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma

BACKGROUND

Achieving optimal surgical outcomes in pancreatic adenocarcinoma requires a combination of both curative-intent resection to oncologic standards and stage-specific neoadjuvant or adjuvant therapy. This investigation sought to examine factors associated with receipt of standard-adherent surgery (SAS) and guideline-recommended therapy (GRT) and determine the impact of compliance on patient survival.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

From the 2006-2016 National Cancer Database, 21,304 patients underwent resection for nonmetastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma. SAS was defined as pancreatic resection with negative margins and ≥ 15 lymph nodes examined. Stage-specific GRT was defined by current National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines. Multivariable models were used to determine predictors of adherence to SAS and GRT and prognostic impact on overall survival.

RESULTS

Overall, SAS was achieved in 39% and GRT in 65% of patients, but only 30% received both SAS and GRT. Increasing age, minority race, uninsured status, and greater comorbidities were associated with a decreased odds of receiving both SAS and GRT (all p < 0.05). SAS (HR 0.79; CI 0.76-0.81; p < 0.001) and GRT (HR 0.67; CI 0.65-0.69; p < 0.001) were each independently associated with a survival advantage. Receipt of both SAS and GRT was associated with significant improvement in median OS compared with receiving neither (2.2 years vs 1.1 years; p < 0.001) which was independently associated with a 78% increased risk of death (HR 1.78; CI 1.70-1.86; p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Despite survival benefits associated with adherence to operative standards and receipt of guideline-recommended therapy, compliance remains poor. Future efforts must be directed toward improved education and implementation efforts around both operative standards and therapy guidelines.

The Impact of a Liver Transplant Program on the Outcomes of Hepatocellular Carcinoma

OBJECTIVE

We sought to evaluate the impact of liver transplantation (LT) programs on the prognosis of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) patients who underwent liver resection (LR) and noncurative intent treatment.

BACKGROUND

LT programs have an array of resources and services that would positively affect the prognosis of patients with HCC.

METHODS

Patients who underwent LT, LR, radiotherapy (RT), or chemotherapy (CTx) for HCC between 2004 and 2018 were included in the National Cancer Database. Institutions with LT programs were defined as those that performed 1 or more LT for at least 5 years. Centers were stratified by hospital volume. The impact of LT programs was assessed after propensity score matching to achieve covariate balance.

RESULTS

A total of 71,735 patients were identified, of which 7997 received LT (11.1%), 12,683 LR (17.7%), 15,675 RT (21.9%), and 35,380 CTx (49.3%). Among a total of 1267 distinct institutions, 94 (7.4%) were categorized as LT programs. Designation as an LT program was also associated with a high volume of LR and noncurative intent treatment (both P <0.001). After propensity score matching, LT programs were associated with better survival among LR and noncurative intent treatment patients. Although hospital volume was also associated with improved prognosis, LT programs were associated with additional survival benefits in noncurative intent treatment. On the other hand, no such benefit was noted in patients who underwent LR.

CONCLUSIONS

The presence of an LT program was associated with a higher volume of LR and noncurative intent treatment. Furthermore, designation as an LT program had a "halo effect" on the prognosis of patients undergoing RT/CTx that went beyond the procedure-volume effect.

Disparities in NCCN Guideline-Compliant Care for Patients with Early-Stage Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma at Minority-Serving versus Non-Minority-Serving Hospitals

BACKGROUND

Racial/ethnic disparities in pancreatic adenocarcinoma (PDAC) outcomes may relate to receipt of National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guideline-compliant care. We assessed the association between treatment at minority-serving hospitals (MSH) and receipt of NCCN-compliant care.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients who underwent resection of early-stage PDAC between 2006 and 2019 were identified from the National Cancer Database (NCDB). MSH was defined as the top decile of facilities treating minority ethnicities (Black and/or Hispanic). Factors associated with receipt of NCCN-compliant care and its impact on overall survival (OS) were assessed.

RESULTS

Among 44,873 patients who underwent resection of PDAC, most were treated at non-MSH (n = 42,571, 94.9%), while a smaller subset were treated at MSH (n = 2302, 5.1%). Patients treated at MSH were more likely to be at a younger median age (MSH 66 years versus non-MSH 67 years), Black or Hispanic (MSH 58.4% versus non-MSH 12.0%), and not insured (MSH 7.8% versus non-MSH 1.6%). While 71.7% (n = 31,182) of patients were compliant with NCCN care, guideline-compliant care was lower at MSH (MSH 62.5% versus non-MSH 72.2%). On multivariable analysis, receiving care at MSH was associated with not receiving guideline-compliant care [odds ratio (OR) 0.63, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.53-0.74]. At non-MSH, non-white patients had lower odds of receiving guideline-compliant PDCA care (OR 0.85, 95% CI 0.78-0.91). Failure to comply was associated with worse overall survival (OS) [hazard ratio (HR) 1.50, 95% CI 1.46-1.54, all p < 0.001].

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with PDAC treated at MSH and minorities treated at non-MSH were less likely to receive NCCN-compliant care. Failure to comply with guideline-based PDAC treatment was associated with worse OS.

Guideline adherence and implementation of tumor board therapy recommendations for patients with gastrointestinal cancer

PURPOSE

Although participation in multidisciplinary tumor boards (MTBs) is an obligatory quality criterion for certification, there is scarce evidence, whether MTB recommendations are consistent with consensus guidelines and whether they are followed in clinical practice. Reasons of guideline and tumor board deviations are poorly understood so far.

METHODS

MTB's recommendations from the weekly MTB for gastrointestinal cancers at the University Cancer Center Leipzig/Germany (UCCL) in 2020 were analyzed for their adherence to therapy recommendations as stated in National German guidelines and implementation within an observation period of 3 months. To assess adherence, an objective classification system was developed assigning a degree of guideline and tumor board adherence to each MTB case. For cases with deviations, underlying causes and influencing factors were investigated and categorized.

RESULTS

76% of MTBs were fully adherent to guidelines, with 16% showing deviations, mainly due to study inclusions and patient comorbidities. Guideline adherence in 8% of case discussions could not be determined, especially because there was no underlying guideline recommendation for the specific topic. Full implementation of the MTBs treatment recommendation occurred in 64% of all cases, while 21% showed deviations with primarily reasons of comorbidities and differing patient wishes. Significantly lower guideline and tumor board adherences were demonstrated in patients with reduced performance status (ECOG-PS ≥ 2) and for palliative intended therapy (p = 0.002/0.007).

CONCLUSIONS

The assessment of guideline deviations and adherence to MTB decisions by a systematic and objective quality assessment tool could become a meaningful quality criterion for cancer centers in Germany.

Impact of sex and age on adherence to guidelines in non-small cell lung cancer management

INTRODUCTION

Age-related disparities in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) treatment are well known, but few studies have assessed the impact of sex on treatment disparities. Disparities in guideline-adherence may explain the superior survival in women with NSCLC. Therefore, we aimed to define patient- and tumor-related factors associated with non-adherence to guidelines in NSCLC management with a special focus on sex and age.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients with NSCLC who received first-line treatment at the Vaasa Central Hospital between 2016 and 2020 were included in the study. The primary outcome was guideline adherence, defined as adherent, undertreatment, or overtreatment considering performance status. A binary logistic regression model was used to calculate the adjusted odds ratio (aOR) for non-adherence to treatment guidelines depending on patient- and tumor-related factors.

RESULTS

321 patients were included in the study. Non-adherence was highest in ≥75-year-old women (41.3%), followed by ≥75-year-old men (32.6%), <75-year-old men (27.6%) and lowest in women <75-year-old (19.7%) (p = 0.035). Non-adherent care consisted more often of undertreatment in <75-year-old men than women (26.0% versus 12.1%) and overtreatment in <75-year-old women than men (7.6% versus 1.6%). Non-adherence was associated with stage III disease (aOR 2.21; 95% CI 1.07-4.59), poor pulmonary function (aOR 3.69, 95% CI 1.56-8.71), and Charlson Comorbidity Index 1-2 (aOR 2.09; 95% CI 1.09-4.01).

CONCLUSION

Sex- and age-related disparities in guideline adherence were observed in <75-year-old men and in ≥75-year-olds. Stage III NSCLC was associated with non-adherence.

Differential effects of the Affordable Care Act on the stage at presentation and receipt of treatment for pancreatic adenocarcinoma

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

For pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) which lacks a recommended screening modality, the benefit of the Affordable Care Act (ACA) may not be an earlier diagnosis, but rather improved rates of treatment. The objective of this study was to examine change in the stage of PDAC presentation and treatment disparities following the ACA.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study of patients with primary PDAC identified in the 2004-2017 National Cancer Database was divided into pre- and post-ACA, for which the primary outcomes of a stage of presentation, receipt of surgical resection, and systemic therapy (termed multimodality) (Stage I-II), and receipt of systemic therapy (Stage III-IV) were compared by multivariable analysis.

RESULTS

228,015 patients were included. Odds of presenting with Stage I-II PDAC were significantly higher in 2011-2017 versus 2004-2010 (odds ratio 1.44, 95% confidence interval 1.40-1.47). Black patients with early-stage disease had a lower likelihood of multimodality therapy and those with advanced disease were less likely to receive systemic therapy, before and after the ACA. Uninsured patients were less likely to receive any therapy compared with insured patients; this disparity increased in the post-ACA period.

CONCLUSIONS

An earlier presentation of PDAC increased following the ACA. However, racial, insurance, and socioeconomic treatment disparities persist.

In search of lost time: Delays in adjuvant therapy for pancreatic adenocarcinoma among under-resourced patient populations

BACKGROUND

The initiation of adjuvant chemotherapy for pancreatic adenocarcinoma within 12 weeks after surgery is recommended by the National Comprehensive Cancer Network. This study seeks to identify factors associated with delayed adjuvant chemotherapy and whether delays impact survival in under-resourced populations.

METHODS

Patients with nonmetastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma who received a definitive resection followed by adjuvant chemotherapy between 2006 and 2017 were queried from the National Cancer Database. Multivariate logistic regression models were constructed to determine the relationship between socioeconomic/clinical variables and delayed adjuvant chemotherapy. Kaplan Meier curves compared survival between under-resourced patients receiving delayed versus timely adjuvant chemotherapy.

RESULTS

Among 25,008 patients, timely adjuvant chemotherapy varied by stage (stage 1: 67.9% vs stage 2: 75.8% vs stage 3: 89.2%; P < .001). Older age (odds ratio 1.02, 95% confidence interval 1.02-1.03; P < .001), Non-Hispanic Black race (odds ratio 1.25, 95% confidence interval 1.11-1.41; P < .001), increasing comorbidity score (odds ratio 1.18, 95% confidence interval 1.12-1.23; P < .001), 30-day readmission (odds ratio 1.45, 95% confidence interval 1.28-1.63; P < .001), and undergoing a Whipple (odds ratio 1.30, 95% confidence interval 1.16-1.44; P < .001) were associated with delayed adjuvant chemotherapy. Conversely, the highest neighborhood median income quartile (odds ratio 0.84, 95% confidence interval 0.73-0.97; P = .021), private insurance (odds ratio 0.59, 95% confidence interval 0.46-0.76; P < .001), Medicare (odds ratio 0.68, 95% confidence interval 0.52-0.88; P = .003), and receipt of neoadjuvant therapy (odds ratio 0.05, 95% confidence interval 0.04-0.06; P < .001) were associated with timely adjuvant chemotherapy. Non-Hispanic Black patients and patients with the lowest neighborhood education had worse overall survival when receiving delayed versus timely adjuvant chemotherapy.

CONCLUSION

Timely adjuvant chemotherapy for pancreatic adenocarcinoma was only achieved in 73.3% of patients. Age, race, comorbidities, median income, and insurance were identified as barriers. Delayed adjuvant chemotherapy was associated with worse survival among under-resourced populations.

Socioeconomic Predictors of Access to Care for Patients with Operatively Managed Pancreatic Cancer in New York State

PURPOSE

We evaluated how race and socioeconomic factors impact access to high-volume surgical centers, treatment initiation, and postoperative care for pancreatic cancer in a state with robust safety net insurance coverage and healthcare infrastructure.

METHODS

The New York Statewide Planning and Research Cooperative System was analyzed. Patients with pancreatic cancer resected from 2007 to 2017 were identified by ICD and CPT codes. Primary outcomes included surgery at low-volume facilities (< 20 pancreatectomies/year), time to therapy initiation, and time to postoperative surveillance imaging (within 60-180 days after surgery).

RESULTS

In total, 3312 patients underwent pancreatectomy across 124 facilities. Median age was 67 years (IQR 59, 75) and 55% of patients were male. Most (72.7%) had surgery at high-volume centers. On multivariable analysis, odds ratios for surgery at low-volume centers were increased for Black race (2.21 (95% CI 1.69-2.88)), Asian race (1.64 (95% CI 1.09-2.43)), Hispanic ethnicity (1.68 (95% CI 1.24-2.28)), Medicaid insurance (2.52 (95% CI 1.79-3.56)), no insurance (2.24 (95% CI 1.38-3.61)), lowest income quartile (3.31 (95% CI 2.14-5.32)), and rural zip code (2.49 (95% CI 1.69-3.65)). Patients treated at low-volume centers waited longer to initiate treatment (hazard ratio (HR) 0.91 (95% CI 0.81-1.01)). Black patients underwent the least surveillance imaging (50.4%; p < 0.0001), while Asian (HR 2.04, 95% CI 1.40-2.98)) and Hispanic patients (HR 1.36 (95% CI 1.00-1.84)) were more likely to have surveillance imaging.

CONCLUSIONS

Race independently affected access to high-volume facilities and surveillance imaging. When considered in light of other accumulating evidence, future efforts might investigate the perceptions and logistical considerations noted by providers and patients alike to identify the etiology of these disparities and then institute corrective measures.