Why Do Long-Distance Travelers Have Improved Pancreatectomy Outcomes?

Lower Socioeconomic Status Predicts Greater Obstacles to Care: Using Outpatient Cholecystectomy as a Model Cohort

BACKGROUND

Patients with low socioeconomic status (SES) are disadvantaged in terms of access to health care. A novel metric for SES is the Distressed Communities Index (DCI). This study evaluates the effect of DCI on hospital choice and distance traveled for surgery.

METHODS

A Florida database was queried for patients with symptomatic cholelithiasis or chronic cholecystitis who underwent an outpatient cholecystectomy between 2016 and 2019. Patients' DCI was compared with hospital ratings, comorbidities, Charlson Comorbidity Index, and distance traveled for surgery. Stepwise logistic regression was used to determine which factors most influenced distance traveled for surgery.

RESULTS

There were 54,649 cases-81 open, 52,488 laparoscopic, and 2,080 robotic. There was no difference between surgical approach and patient's DCI group (p = 0.12). Rural patients traveled the farthest for surgery (avg 21.29 miles); urban patients traveled the least (avg 5.84 miles). Patients from distressed areas more often had surgery at one- or two-star hospitals than prosperous patients (61% vs 36.3%). Regression indicated distressed or at-risk areas predicted further travel for rural/small-town patients, while higher hospital ratings predicted further travel for suburban/urban patients.

DISCUSSION

Compared to prosperous areas, patients from distressed areas have surgery at lower-rated hospitals, travel further if they live in rural/small-town areas, but travel less if they live in suburban areas. We postulate that farther travel in rural areas may be explained by a lack of health care resources in poor, rural areas, while traveling less in suburban areas may be explained by personal lack of resources for patients with low SES.

Travel burden and bypassing closest site for surgical cancer treatment for urban and rural oncology patients

PURPOSE

We examined the relationship between travel burden for surgical cancer care and rurality, geographic bypass of the nearest surgical facility, cancer type, and mortality outcomes.

METHODS

Using Medicare claims and enrollment data (2016-2018) from beneficiaries with cancer of the colon, rectum, lung, or pancreas, we measured travel times to: the nearest surgical facility and facility used. For those who bypassed the nearest, we examined travel time and rurality in relation to surgical rates. Using multivariable regression modeling, we estimated associations of bypass with 90-day postoperative- and one-year mortality; rurality was examined as an effect modifier.

FINDINGS

Among 211,025 beneficiaries with cancer, 25.5% resided in non-metropolitan areas. About 66% of metropolitan/micropolitan, and 78% of small town/rural patients bypassed their closest facility. Increasing rurality was significantly associated with increased likelihood of bypass (Referent = metropolitan, OR; 95%CI: micropolitan 1.10; 1.04-1.16, small town/rural 2.08; 1.96-2.20. Bypassing the nearest facility was associated with decreased likelihood of both 90-day postoperative mortality (OR = 0.79; 95%CI 0.74-0.85) and 1-year mortality (OR = 0.81; 95%CI 0.77-0.86). The greatest decrement in 1-year mortality was for pancreatic cancer across all rural-urban categories (OR; 95%CI: metropolitan 0.63; 0.53-0.76; micropolitan 0.53; 0.29-0.97); small town/rural 0.46; 0.25-0.86).

CONCLUSIONS

Most Medicare beneficiaries with lung, colon, rectal, or pancreatic cancer bypassed the closest facility providing surgical cancer care, especially rural patients. Bypassing was associated with a lower likelihood of 90-day postoperative, and 1-year mortality. Understanding determinants of bypassing, particularly among rural patients, may reveal potential mechanisms to improve cancer outcomes and reduce rural cancer disparities.

Redefining at-risk patients undergoiong pancreaticoduodenectomy: Impact of socioeconomic factors including Area Deprivation Index and distance traveled

BACKGROUND

The Whipple procedure for pancreatic adenocarcinoma frequently is referred to surgeons at high-volume centers, which requires that patients travel long distances, potentially impacting patient outcomes. Furthermore, patients with pancreatic cancer from underserved areas often have poor outcomes. There are limited data on Whipple outcomes on the basis of both socioeconomic and distance traveled.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study examined patients who underwent the Whipple procedure for pancreatic adenocarcinoma at a tertiary care center from 2019 to 2021. Patients who lived in areas with an Area Deprivation Index national percentile of >50% and ≥100 miles away from the care center were labeled as "at-risk" patients.

RESULTS

Seventy-eight patients were included, with 22 (28.2%) patients determined to be at risk. The preoperative characteristics were comparable between the patients in the at-risk and standard-risk groups. Postoperatively, patients in the at-risk group were more likely to require reoperation (13.6% vs 0%; P = .020) and less likely to undergo adjuvant chemotherapy (73.2% vs 50%; P = .034) than patients in the standard-risk group; pathologic staging and frequency of previous use of neoadjuvant chemotherapy were not significantly different between the groups. At-risk status did not influence overall survival or recurrence rate.

CONCLUSIONS

Through the integration of distance traveled and Area Deprivation Index, we have redefined the characterization of at-risk patients with pancreatic adenocarcinoma, who are at greater risk of undergoing reoperation and not receiving adjuvant chemotherapy. By addressing these intersecting challenges, providers can mitigate disparities and improve the care of these patients with pancreatic adenocarcinoma.

The impact of distance to facility on treatment modality, short-term outcomes, and survival of patients with HPV-positive oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma

PURPOSE

This study compared treatment and outcomes for patients with HPV-positive oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma (OPSCC) based on their travel distance to treatment facility.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Patients with cT1-4, N0-3, M0 HPV-positive OPSCC in the National Cancer Database from 2010 to 2019 were identified and split into four quartiles based on distance to facility, with quartile 4 representing patients with furthest travel distances. Multivariable-adjusted logistic regression and Cox proportional hazards modeling were used to analyze the primary outcome of treatment received, and secondary outcomes of clinical stage, overall survival, surgical approach (i.e., TORS versus other), and 30-day surgical readmissions.

RESULTS

17,207 patients with HPV-positive OPSCC were evenly distributed into four quartiles. Compared to patients in quartile 1, patients in quartile 4 were 40 % less likely to receive radiation versus surgery (OR = 0.60; 95 % CI = 0.54-0.66). Among the patients who received surgery, quartile 4 had a higher odds of receiving TORS treatment compared to quartile 1 (4v1: OR = 2.38; 95 % CI = 2.05-2.77), quartile 2 (4v2: OR = 2.31, 95 % CI = 2.00-2.66), and quartile 3 (4v3: OR = 1.75; 95 % CI = 1.54-1.99). Quartile 4 had a decreased odds of mortality compared to Quartile 1 (4v1: OR = 0.87; 95 % CI = 0.79-0.97). There were no differences among the quartiles in presenting stage and 30-day readmissions.

CONCLUSIONS

This study found that patients with furthest travel distance to facility were more often treated surgically over non-surgical management, with TORS over open surgery, and had better overall survival. These findings highlight potential disparities in access to care for patients with HPV-positive OPSCC.

Accessibility to ERCP-performing hospitals among patients with pancreatic cancer living in SEER regions

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

The two most common interventions used to treat painless jaundice from pancreatic cancer are endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) and percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage (PTBD). Our study aimed to characterize the geographic distribution of ERCP-performing hospitals among patients with pancreatic cancer in the United States and the association between geographic accessibility to ERCP-performing hospitals and biliary interventions patients receive.

METHODS

This is a retrospective cohort study using the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER)-Medicare database for pancreatic cancer from 2005 to 2013. Multilevel models were used to examine the association between accessibility to ERCP hospitals within a 30- and 45-min drive from the patient's residential ZIP Code and the receipt of ERCP treatment. A two-step floating catchment area model was used to calculate the measure of accessibility based on the distribution across SEER regions.

RESULTS

7464 and 782 patients underwent ERCP and PTBD, respectively, over the study period. There were 808 hospitals in which 8246 patients diagnosed with pancreatic cancer in SEER regions from 2005 to 2013 received a procedure. Patients with high accessibility within both 30- and 45-min drive to an ERCP-performing hospital were more likely to receive an ERCP (30-min adjusted odds ratio [aOR]: 1.53, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.17-2.01; 45-min aOR: 1.31, 95% CI: 1.01-1.70). Furthermore, in the adjusted model, Black patients (vs. White) and patients with stage IV disease were less likely to receive ERCP than PTBD.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with pancreatic cancer and high accessibility to an ERCP-performing hospital were more likely to receive ERCP. Disparities in the receipt of ERCP persisted for Black patients regardless of their access to ERCP-performing hospitals.

Underlying Bias in the Treatment of Pancreatic Cancer: Minorities Treated at the Same Facilities are Less Likely to Receive Neoadjuvant Therapy

OBJECTIVE

To identify disparities in access to NAT for PDAC at the prehospital and intrahospital phases of care.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Delivery of NAT in PDAC is susceptible to disparities in access. There are limited data that accurately locate the etiology of disparities at the prehospital and intrahospital phases of care.

METHODS

Retrospective cohort of patients ≥18 years old with clinical stage I-II PDAC from the 2010-2016 National Cancer Database. Multiple logistic regression was used to assess 2 sequential outcomes: (1) access to an NAT facility (prehospital phase) and (2) receipt of NAT at an NAT facility (intrahospital phase).

RESULTS

A total of 36,208 patients were included for analysis in the prehospital phase of care. Higher education, longer travel distances, being treated at academic/research or integrated network cancer programs, and more recent year of diagnosis were independently associated with receipt of treatment at an NAT facility. All patients treated at NAT facilities (31,099) were included for the second analysis. Higher education level and receiving care at an academic/research facility were independently associated with increased receipt of NAT. NonBlack racial minorities (including American Indian, Asian, Pacific Islanders), being Hispanic, being uninsured, and having Medicaid insurance were associated with decreased receipt of NAT at NAT facilities.

CONCLUSIONS

Non-Black racial minorities and Hispanic patients were less likely to receive NAT at NAT facilities compared to White and non-Hispanic patients, respectively. Discrepancies in administration of NAT while being treated at NAT facilities exist and warrant urgent further investigation.

High surgical volume is associated with improved survival in head and neck cancer

OBJECTIVES

Examine the relationship between hospital volume and overall mortality in a surgical cohort of head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) patients.

MATERIALS & METHODS

A retrospective review of the NCDB was completed for adults with previously untreated HNSCC diagnosed between 2004 and 2016. Mean annual hospital volume was calculated using the number of head and neck cancer cases treated at a given facility divided by the number of years the facility reported to the NCDB. Facilities were separated into three categories based on their volume percentile, informed by inflection points from a natural cubic spline: Hospital Group 1 (<50%); Hospital Group 2 (50-90%); Hospital Group 3 (90%+). Cox proportional hazard models were used to examine the association between volume percentiles (continuous or categorical) with patient overall survival, adjusting for important patient and facility variables known to impact survival.

RESULTS

Risk of death decreased by 2.97% for every 10% increase in facility percentile after adjusting for other risk factors. Patients treated at facilities in Hospital Group 1 had a 23.1% increase in risk of mortality (HR 1.231 [95% CI 1.12-1.35]) relative those at facilities in Hospital Group 3. No significant difference in mortality risk was found between Hospital Group 2 versus Hospital Group 3 (HR 1.031 [95% CI 0.97-1.10]).

CONCLUSIONS

Survival of HNSCC patients is significantly improved when treated at facilities >50th percentile in annual hospital volume. This may support the regionalization of care to high volume head and neck centers with comprehensive facilities and supportive services to maximize patient outcomes.

Disparities in treatment and survival for patients with isolated colorectal liver metastases

BACKGROUND

Surgical resection improves survival for patients with isolated colorectal liver metastasis. National studies on the disparities related to this topic are limited; therefore, we investigated factors that affect surgical treatment and survival.

METHODS

We queried the National Cancer Database (2010-2017) for patients with isolated synchronous colorectal liver metastasis. Multivariable logistic regression and Cox proportional hazard regressions were used to identify factors associated with surgical resection, treatment at high-volume facilities, and overall survival.

RESULTS

Of 34,050 patients with isolated colorectal liver metastasis, surgical resection (n = 7,810; 23.0%) was more likely among patients who were of high socioeconomic status (odds ratio = 1.16; 95% confidence interval, 1.04-1.31), traveled long distance for treatment (odds ratio = 1.48; 95% confidence interval, 1.31-1.66), and were treated at high-volume facilities (odds ratio = 4.86; 95% confidence interval, 14.45-5.30). Black patients were less likely to undergo resection (odds ratio = 0.75; 95% confidence interval, 0.69-0.82). Treatment at high-volume facility was more common among patients who were Black (odds ratio = 1.14; 95% confidence interval, 1.07-1.21), were of high socioeconomic status (socioeconomic status index 7: odds ratio = 1.21; 95% confidence interval, 1.11-1.31), and traveled long distance (odds ratio = 4.03; 95% confidence interval, 3.63-4.48) and less likely for nonmetropolitan residents and those of low socioeconomic status (P < .05). Patients of high socioeconomic status and those who traveled long distance, were treated at high-volume facilities, underwent surgical resection, and received perioperative chemotherapy had an associated survival advantage (P < .05 for all), whereas Black race was associated with poorer overall survival (P < .05).

CONCLUSION

Nonmedical patient factors, such as race, socioeconomic status, and geography, are associated with treatment and survival for isolated colorectal liver metastases. Disparities persist after adjusting for surgical resection and treatment facility. These barriers must be addressed to improve care for vulnerable cancer patients.

Equity of travel required to access first definitive surgery for liver or stomach cancer in New Zealand

In New Zealand, there are known disparities between the Indigenous Māori and the majority non-Indigenous European populations in access to cancer treatment, with resulting disparities in cancer survival. There is international evidence of ethnic disparities in the distance travelled to access cancer treatment; and as such, the aim of this paper was to examine the distance and time travelled to access surgical care between Māori and European liver and stomach cancer patients. We used national-level data and Geographic Information Systems (GIS) analysis to describe the distance travelled by patients to receive their first primary surgery for liver or stomach cancer, as well as the estimated time to travel this distance by road, and the surgical volume of hospitals performing these procedures. All cases of liver (ICD-10-AM 3rd edition code: C22) and stomach (C16) cancer that occurred in New Zealand (2007–2019) were drawn from the New Zealand Cancer Registry (liver cancer: 866 Māori, 2,460 European; stomach cancer: 953 Māori, 3,192 European), and linked to national inpatient hospitalisation records to examine access to surgery. We found that Māori on average travel 120km for liver cancer surgery, compared to around 60km for Europeans, while a substantial minority of both Māori and European liver cancer patients must travel more than 200km for their first primary liver surgery, and this situation appears worse for Māori (36% vs 29%; adj. OR 1.48, 95% CI 1.09–2.01). No such disparities were observed for stomach cancer. This contrast between cancers is likely driven by the centralisation of liver cancer surgery relative to stomach cancer. In order to support Māori to access liver cancer care, we recommend that additional support is provided to Māori patients (including prospective financial support), and that efforts are made to remotely provide those clinical services that can be decentralised.

Evaluating Distance Bias in Chronic Rhinosinusitis Outcomes

Importance

The distance traveled by patients for medical care is associated with patient outcomes (ie, distance bias) and is a limitation in outcomes research. However, to date, distance bias has not been examined in rhinologic studies.

Objective

To evaluate the association of distance traveled by a cohort of patients with chronic rhinosinusitis with baseline disease severity and treatment outcomes.

Design, Setting, and Participants

A total of 505 patients with chronic rhinosinusitis were prospectively enrolled in a multi-institutional, cross-sectional study in academic tertiary care centers between April 2011 and January 2020. Participants self-selected continued appropriate medical therapy or endoscopic sinus surgery. The 22-item Sinonasal Outcome Test (SNOT-22) and Medical Outcomes Study Short Form 6-D (SF-6D) health utility value scores were recorded at enrollment and follow-up. Data on the distances traveled by patients to the medical centers, based on residence zip codes, and medical comorbid conditions were collected.

Exposures

Distance traveled by patient to obtain rhinologic care.

Main Outcomes and Measures

SNOT-22 and SF-6D scores. Scores for SNOT-22 range from 0 to 110; and for SF-6D, from 0.0 to 1.0. Higher SNOT-22 total scores indicate worse overall symptom severity. Higher SF-6D scores indicate better overall health utility; 1.0 represents perfect health and 0.0 represents death.

Results

The median age for the 505 participants was 56.0 years (IQR, 41.0-64.0 years), 261 were men (51.7%), 457 were White (90.5%), and 13 were Hispanic or Latino (2.6%). These categories were collected according to criteria described and required by the National Institutes of Health and therefore do not equal the entire cohort. Patients traveled a median distance of 31.6 miles (50.6 km) (IQR, 12.2-114.5 miles [19.5-183.2 km]). Baseline (r = 0.00; 95% CI, 0.00-0.18) and posttreatment (r = 0.01; 95% CI, -0.07 to 0.10) SNOT-22 scores, as well as baseline (r = -0.12; 95% CI, -0.21 to -0.04) and posttreatment (r = 0.07; 95% CI, -0.02 to 0.16) SF-6D scores, were not associated with distance. There was no clinically meaningful correlation between distance traveled and mean comorbidity burden. Nevertheless, patients with a history of endoscopic sinus surgery were more likely to travel longer distances to obtain care (Cliff delta = 0.28; 95% CI, 0.19-0.38).

Conclusions and Relevance

Although this cross-sectional study found that some patients appear more willing to travel longer distances for chronic rhinosinusitis care, results suggest that distance traveled to academic tertiary care centers was not associated with disease severity, outcomes, or comorbidity burden. These findings argue for greater generalizability of study results across various cohorts independent of distance traveled to obtain rhinologic care.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02720653.

Access to Left Ventricular Assist Device: Travel Time Does Not Tell The Whole Story

BACKGROUND

Negative health effects of traveling longer distances for surgical services have been reported. Given the high complexity of multidisciplinary care required for management of Left Ventricular Assist Device (LVAD) implantation, only 4 of 18 centers in our state perform these operations. Given the limited access we hypothesized increased travel time would adversely affect postoperative outcomes and 30-d mortality.

METHODS

A statewide Society of Thoracic Surgeons database was queried to identify patients undergoing Heartmate II/III and HVAD implantation, and 725 patients were identified. Travel time was calculated by zip code. Patients were stratified into regional and distant groups by the upper quartile of travel time (1-h). Preoperative variables and outcomes were compared between the groups. Multivariate analysis was performed to evaluate the impact of travel time in risk-adjusted models of 30-d mortality.

RESULTS

Median patient travel time to their LVAD center in our state is 32 min (mean 53 ± 65 min, 46 ± 71 miles). Patients in the distant group (n = 191) had lower median incomes, higher self-pay status, higher rates of medical comorbid disease. Despite these differences there was no difference between the groups in ICU and/or hospital length of stay, readmission, postoperative complications, or 30-d mortality. Multivariate regression demonstrated insurance status, age, and prior surgery predicted 30-d mortality, but not travel time.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite only four centers in the state performing LVAD implantation, travel time was strongly associated with preoperative risk, and socioeconomic status but not postoperative outcomes or 30-d mortality. Therefore, increasing access should focus on insurance, and patient characteristics not travel time.

Geographic variation in diagnostic and treatment interval, cancer stage and mortality among colorectal patients - An international comparison between Denmark and Scotland using data-linked cohorts

BACKGROUND

Rurald wellers with colorectal cancer have poorer outcomes than their urban counterparts. The reasons why are not known but are likely to be complex and be determined by an interplay between geography and health service organization. By comparing the associations related to travel-time to primary and secondary healthcare facilities in two neighbouring countries, Denmark and Scotland, we aimed to shed light on potential mechanisms.

METHODS

Analysis was based on two comprehensive cohorts of patients diagnosed with colorectal cancer in Denmark (2010-16) and Scotland (2007-14). Associations between travel-time and cancer pathway intervals, tumour stage at diagnosis and one-year mortality were analysed using generalised linear models. Travel-time was modelled using restricted cubic splines for each country and combined. Adjustments were made for key confounders.

RESULTS

Travel-time to key healthcare facilities influenced the diagnostic experience and outcomes of CRC patients from Scotland and Denmark to some extent differently. The longest travel-times to a specialised hospital appeared to afford the most rapid secondary care interval, whereas moderate travel-times to hospital (about 20-60 min) appeared to impact on later stage and greater one-year mortality in Scotland, but not in Denmark. A U-shaped association was seen between travel-time to the GP and one year-mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

This is the first international data-linkage study to explore how different national geographies and health service structures may determine cancer outcomes. Future research should compare more countries and more cancer sites and evaluate the impact and implications of differences in national health service organisation.

Geographic remoteness from a multidisciplinary team is associated with an increased clinical staging of head and neck cancer: a Newcastle (Australia) study

The purpose of this study was to investigate the relationship between a patient's residential distance from a tertiary referral regional multidisciplinary team (MDT) and the clinical staging of their head and neck cancer (HNC) at presentation. A retrospective cohort study was performed of all attendees with HNC who had undergone an MDT assessment. The period of study was January 2016 to January 2017. The primary predictor variable was the patient's residential distance from the MDT. Demographic and clinicopathological factors were recorded. The primary outcome variable was the clinical staging conferred by the MDT. Descriptive and ordinal logistical regression analyses were conducted to examine the data. There were 286 observations; 230 patients were male and 56 were female. The mean age of the cohort was 66.52 years. The average residential distance from the MDT was 68.16 km. Regression analysis, while not statistically significant, indicated that those living more than 100 km (range 102-592 km) from the MDT had a 1.49 times increased risk of being diagnosed with an advanced stage of cancer when compared to those living less than 100 km away. This study provides insights into the potential adverse effect geographic remoteness has on initial staging of HNC and the need for further strategies to serve this at-risk population.

Postoperative and long-term survival in relation to life-expectancy after pancreatic surgery in elderly patients (cohort study)

Background

An evaluation of the outcome after pancreatic surgery with focus on post-operative and late survival in elderly patients was performed.

Methods

The study included 1.556 patients from a single HBP unit operated from 1. January 2010 to 31. December 2019. Patients were divided into two cohorts, < 75 years (n = 1.296) and ≥75 years (n = 260). Post-operative outcome was evaluated in all patients and late outcome in patients with adenocarcinoma in the pancreas (n = 765) and the duodenum (n = 117). The follow-up of patients with benign disease and adenocarcinoma was 57.95 (12.1–132.7) and 39.85 (12.0–131.7) months, respectively.

Results

Length of hospital-stay and surgical complications were not significantly different in the two cohorts, but in-hospital death was 1.1% (<75 years) and 3.5% (≥75 years) (p = 0.008). The median overall survival of adenocarcinoma was 29.7 (<75 years) and 24.3 months (≥75 years) (p = 0.3228) with a one, two, and five-years survival of 74.5%, 56.6% and 28.6% vs. 73.6%, 51.1%, and 25.5%. Median time to relapse (46.2% of patients <75 years and 40.5% of patients ≥75 years) was 9 (1 - 51) and 8 (1 - 78) months (p = 0.534), respectively. Adjuvant chemotherapy did not have impact on the survival of the old cohort. Patients who died during the observation period had lost 94% (<75 years) and 87% (≥75 years) of expected remnant life. Estimated years lost in the old cohort was 4.2 in males and 4.9 in females (p = 0.025)

Conclusion

Elderly patients may undergo pancreatic surgery with a low mortality and for adenocarcinoma with an acceptable long-term survival.

•

Surgery is the only potentially curable treatment to pancreatic cancer.

•

Elderly patients may tolerate pancreatic surgery with low mortality.

•

Radical pancreatic surgery improves long-term survival, also in elderly patients.

•

Operability should be evaluated from morbidity and biological age.

•

Pancreatic surgery in elderly should only be performed in high volume centers.

Simulated Volume-Based Regionalization of Complex Procedures: Impact on Spatial Access to Care

OBJECTIVE

This study simulates the regionalization of pancreatectomies to assess its impact on spatial access in terms of patient driving times.

BACKGROUND

Although policies to regionalize complex procedures to high-volume centers may improve outcomes, the impact on patient access is unknown.

METHODS

Patients who underwent pancreatectomies from 2005 to 2014 were identified from California's statewide database. Round-trip driving times between patients' home ZIP code and hospital addresses were calculated via Google Maps. Regionalization was simulated by eliminating hospitals performing <20 pancreatectomies/yr, and reassigning patients to the next closest hospital that satisfied the volume threshold. Sensitivity analyses were performed for New York and Medicare patients to assess for influence of geography and insurance coverage, respectively.

RESULTS

Of 13,317 pancreatectomies, 6335 (47.6%) were performed by hospitals with <20 cases/yr. Patients traveled a median of 49.8 minutes [interquartile range (IQR) 30.8-96.2] per round-trip. A volume-restriction policy would increase median round-trip driving time by 24.1 minutes (IQR 4.5-53.5). Population in-hospital mortality rates were estimated to decrease from 6.7% to 2.8% (P < 0.001). Affected patients were more likely to be racial minorities (44.6% vs 36.5% of unaffected group, P < 0.001) and covered by Medicaid or uninsured (16.3% vs 9.8% of unaffected group, P < 0.001). Sensitivity analyses revealed a 17.8 minutes increment for patients in NY (IQR 0.8-47.4), and 27.0 minutes increment for Medicare patients (IQR 6.2-57.1).

CONCLUSIONS

A policy that limits access to low-volume pancreatectomy hospitals will increase round-trip driving time by 24 minutes, but up to 54 minutes for 25% of patients. Population mortality rates may improve by 1.5%.

Disparities in the Use of Neoadjuvant Therapy for Resectable Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma

BACKGROUND

Current guidelines support either immediate surgical resection or neoadjuvant therapy (NT) for patients with resectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). However, which patients are selected for NT and whether disparities exist in the use of NT for PDAC are not well understood.

METHODS

Using the National Cancer Database from 2004 through 2016, the clinical, demographic, socioeconomic, and hospital-related characteristics of patients with stage I/II PDAC who underwent immediate surgery versus NT followed by surgery were compared.

RESULTS

Among 58,124 patients who underwent pancreatectomy, 8,124 (14.0%) received NT whereas 50,000 (86.0%) did not. Use of NT increased significantly throughout the study period (from 3.5% in 2004 to 26.4% in 2016). Multivariable logistic regression analysis showed that travel distance, education level, hospital facility type, clinical T stage, tumor size, and year of diagnosis were associated with increased use of NT, whereas comorbidities, uninsured/Medicaid status, South/West geography, left-sided tumor location, and increasing age were associated with immediate surgery (all P<.001). Based on logistic regression-derived interaction factors, the association between NT use and median income, education level, Midwest location, clinical T stage, and clinical N stage significantly increased over time (all P<.01).

CONCLUSIONS

In addition to traditional clinicopathologic factors, several demographic, socioeconomic, and hospital-related factors are associated with use of NT for PDAC. Because NT is used increasingly for PDAC, efforts to reduce disparities will be critical in improving outcomes for all patients with pancreatic cancer.

Traveling to Receive Treatment for Extremity Soft Tissue Sarcomas: Is it worth the drive?

BACKGROUND

Regionalization of sarcoma care may improve outcomes. Concerns exist regarding the burdens of travel and its effects on care. We evaluate the presence of a "distance bias".

METHODS

Retrospective cohort study of patients with extremity soft tissue sarcoma (stage I-III) within the NCDB. Travel distance (TD) and hospital volume (VOL) were categorized into quartiles. Alternating statistical models were used for analysis.

RESULTS

1,035 hospitals contributed 11,979 cases. Median and maximum VOL were 5 and 45 cases/year. VOL quartiles were "low-volume" (LV) (892 hospitals, < 3 cases/yr.), "intermediate low-volume" (ILV) (89, 3-5 cases/yr.), "intermediate high-volume" (IHV) (39, 6-12 cases/yr.), and "high-volume" (HV) (15, > 12 cases/yr.). TD quartiles: "short-travel" (ST) (< 8 mi), "intermediate-short travel" (IST) (8-17), "intermediate long-travel" (ILT) (18-49), and "long-travel" (LT) (> 50). VOL but not TD is associated with improved survival [HR 0.65 (CI 0.52-0.83)] and rate of R0 resection [1.87 (CI 1.4-2.5)] but has no effect on amputation rates. Matched analyses demonstrate similar results.

CONCLUSIONS

Hospital volume but not distance traveled to treatment facility is associated with improved survival and R0 resections for extremity soft tissue sarcomas. Despite the inconveniences of travel, patients may benefit from treatment at high volume centers.

Municipality and Adjusted Gross Income Influence Outcome of Patients Diagnosed with Pancreatic Cancer in a Newly Developed Cancer Center in Mercer County New Jersey, USA, a Single Center Study

Socioeconomic status (SES) correlates directly to ZIP code. Mercer County is not atypical as a collection of a dozen municipalities with a suburban/metropolitan population of 370,430 in the immediate vicinity of a major medical center. The purpose of this study for Mercer County, New Jersey, USA is to determine whether a patient's ZIP code is related to the outlook of pancreatic cancer defined as staging at diagnosis, prevalence, overall survival, type of insurance, and recurrence. Our hypothesis was that specific variables such as socio-economic status or race could be linked to the outcome of patients with pancreatic cancer. We interrogated a convenience sample from our cancer center registry and obtained 479 subjects diagnosed with pancreatic cancer in 1998-2018. We selected 339 subjects by ZIP code, representing the plurality of the cases in our catchment area. The outcome variable was overall survival; predictor variables were socio-economic status (SES), recurrence, insurance, type of treatment, gender, cancer stage, age, and race. We converted ZIP code to municipality and culled data using adjusted gross income (AGI, FY 2017). Comparative statistical analysis was performed using chi-square tests for nominal and ordinal variables, and a two-way ANOVA test was used for continuous variables; the p-value was set at 0.05. Our analysis confirmed that overall survival was significantly higher for Whites and for individuals who live in a municipality with a high SES. Tumor stage at the time of diagnosis was not different among race and SES; however, statistically significant differences for race or SES existed in the type of treatment received, with disparities found in those who received radiation therapy and surgery but not chemotherapy. The data may point to a lack of access to specific care modalities that subsequently may lead to lower survival in an underserved population. Access to care, optimal nutritional status, overall fitness, and co-morbidities could play a major role and confound the results. Our study suggests that low SES has a negative impact on overall pancreatic cancer survival. Surgery for pancreatic cancer should be appropriately decentralized to those community cancer centers that possess the expertise and the infrastructure to carry out specialized treatments regardless of race, ethnicity, SES, and insurance.

Impact of distance from implant center on mechanical circulatory device patient outcomes

OBJECTIVES

Patients on left ventricular assist device (LVAD) support receive extensive care and education before discharge home. We investigated the impact of patient's residential distance from LVAD implantation center on outcomes and survival.

METHODS

A total of 214 patients received a LVAD between 2006 and 2018 at our institution. Patient's residential distance from the LVAD implantation center, LVAD complications, hospitalization, and death were recorded. Patients were divided into two groups: patients living less than or equal to 100 miles (Group 1), patients living more than 100 (Group 2).

RESULTS

A total of 106 patients were assigned to Group 1 and 108 patients were assigned to Group 2. Destination therapy was intended in 20% of patients in Group 1 and 34% in Group 2 (p = .023). Mean length of stay was 13 ± 9 days for Group 1 and 21 ± 12 for Group 2 (p < .001). Major postoperative complications were unplanned readmissions due to infections (9% and 12%), gastrointenstinal bleeding (15% and 14%), cerebrovascular accidents (6% and 7.4%), and acute kidney injury (5% and 2%), respectively for Group 1 and Group 2. There was no difference in major complications (all p > .05) and survival between patients in both groups (p > .05).

CONCLUSIONS

Distance from implanting center had no impact on adverse outcomes after LVAD implantation. There was a significant increase in hospital stay for patients who live far from the implanting center, suggesting that distance should not be a contraindication when considering patients for LVAD therapy, but plans should be made for prolonged hospital stay or extended local stay near the hospital for close follow-up.

Hospital Surgical Volume and 3-Year Mortality in Severe Prognosis Cancers: A Population-Based Study Using Cancer Registry Data

BACKGROUND

The impact of hospital surgical volume on long-term mortality has not been well assessed in Japan, especially for esophageal, biliary tract, and pancreatic cancer, although these three cancers need a high level of medical-technical skill. The purpose of this study was to examine associations between hospital surgical volume and 3-year mortality for these severe-prognosis cancer patients.

METHODS

Patients who received curative surgery for esophageal, biliary tract, and pancreatic cancers were analyzed using the Osaka Cancer Registry data from 2006-2013. Hospital surgical volume was categorized into tertiles (high/middle/low) according to the average annual number of curative surgeries per hospital for each cancer. Three-year survivals were calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Hazard ratios (HRs) of 3-year mortality were calculated using Cox proportional hazard models, adjusting for patient characteristics.

RESULTS

Three-year survival was higher with increased hospital surgical volume for all three cancers, but the relative importance of volume varied across sites. After adjustment for all confounding factors, HRs in middle- and low-volume hospitals were 1.34 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.14-1.58) and 1.57 (95% CI, 1.33-1.86) for esophageal cancer; 1.39 (95% CI, 1.15-1.67) and 1.57 (95% CI, 1.30-1.89) for biliary tract cancer; 1.38 (95% CI, 1.16-1.63) and 1.90 (95% CI, 1.60-2.25) for pancreatic cancer, respectively. In particular for localized pancreatic cancer, the impact of hospital surgical volume on 3-year mortality was strong (HR 2.66; 95% CI, 1.61-4.38).

CONCLUSION

We suggest that patients who require curative surgery for esophageal, biliary tract, and pancreatic cancer may benefit from referral to high-volume hospitals.

Impact of facility type and volume in low-grade glioma outcomes

OBJECTIVE

The object of this study was to investigate the impact of facility type (academic center [AC] vs non-AC) and facility volume (high-volume facility [HVF] vs low-volume facility [LVF]) on low-grade glioma (LGG) outcomes.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study included 5539 LGG patients (2004-2014) from the National Cancer Database. Patients were categorized by facility type and volume (non-AC vs AC, HVF vs LVF). An HVF was defined as the top 1% of facilities according to the number of annual cases. Outcomes included overall survival, treatment receipt, and postoperative outcomes. Kaplan-Meier and Cox proportional-hazards models were applied. The Heller explained relative risk was computed to assess the relative importance of each survival predictor.

RESULTS

Significant survival advantages were observed at HVFs (HR 0.67, 95% CI 0.55-0.82, p < 0.001) and ACs (HR 0.84, 95% CI 0.73-0.97, p = 0.015), both prior to and after adjusting for all covariates. Tumor resection was 41% and 26% more likely to be performed at HVFs vs LVFs and ACs vs non-ACs, respectively. Chemotherapy was 40% and 88% more frequently to be utilized at HVFs vs LVFs and ACs vs non-ACs, respectively. Prolonged length of stay (LOS) was decreased by 42% and 24% at HVFs and ACs, respectively. After tumor histology, tumor pattern, and codeletion of 1p19q, facility type and surgical procedure were the most important contributors to survival variance. The main findings remained consistent using propensity score matching and multiple imputation.

CONCLUSIONS

This study provides evidence of survival benefits among LGG patients treated at HVFs and ACs. An increased likelihood of undergoing resections, receiving adjuvant therapies, having shorter LOSs, and the multidisciplinary environment typically found at ACs and HVFs are important contributors to the authors' finding.

Traveling for Pancreatic Cancer Care Is Worth the Trip

BACKGROUND

Centralized care for patients with pancreatic cancer is associated with longer survival. We hypothesized that increased travel distance from home is associated with increased survival for pancreatic cancer patients.

METHODS

The National Cancer Database user file for all pancreatic cancer patients was investigated from 2004 through 2015. Distance from the patients' zip code to the treating facility was determined. Survival was investigated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Cox hazard ratios (CoxHRs) were determined based on stage of disease, distance traveled for care, and clinical factors.

RESULTS

340 780 patients were identified. In the average age of 68 ± 12 years, 51% were male and 83% were Caucasian. For all stages of cancer, longer survival was associated with traveling farther (P < .001). The survival advantage was longer for Caucasians than African Americans (3.7 months vs. 2.6 months, P < .001) Travel was associated with a 13% decrease in risk of death (P < .001). Even controlling for the pathologic stage, traveling farther was associated with decreased risk of death (CoxHR = .91, P < .001).

DISCUSSION

Traveling for care is associated with improved survival for pancreatic cancer patients. While a selection bias may exist, the fact that all stages of patients investigated benefited suggests that this is a real phenomenon.

Ovarian cancer in California: Guideline adherence, survival, and the impact of geographic location, 1996-2014

BACKGROUND

Evidence suggests that geographic location may independently contribute to ovarian cancer survival. We aimed to investigate how the association between residential location and ovarian cancer-specific survival in California varies by race/ethnicity and socioeconomic status.

METHODS

Additive Cox proportional hazard models were used to predict hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) for the association between geographic location throughout California and survival among 29,844 women diagnosed with epithelial ovarian cancer between 1996 and 2014. We conducted permutation tests to determine a global P-value for significance of location. Adjusted analyses considered distance traveled for care, distance to closest high-quality-of-care hospital, and receipt of National Comprehensive Cancer Network guideline care. Models were also stratified by stage, race/ethnicity, and socioeconomic status.

RESULTS

Location was significant in unadjusted models (P = 0.009 among all stages) but not in adjusted models (P = 0.20). HRs ranged from 0.81 (95% CI: 0.70, 0.93) in Southern Central Valley to 1.41 (95% CI: 1.15, 1.73) in Northern California but were attenuated after adjustment (maximum HR = 1.17, 95% CI: 1.08, 1.27). Better survival was generally observed for patients traveling longer distances for care. Associations between survival and proximity to closest high-quality-of-care hospitals were null except for women of lowest socioeconomic status living furthest away (HR = 1.22, 95% CI: 1.03, 1.43).

CONCLUSIONS

Overall, geographic variations observed in ovarian cancer-specific survival were due to important predictors such as receiving guideline-adherent care. Improving access to expert care and ensuring receipt of guideline-adherent treatment should be priorities in optimizing ovarian cancer survival.

Does Distance to Treatment Affect Mortality Rate for Surgical Oncology Patients?

INTRODUCTION

Using the National Cancer Database (NCDB), we seek to analyze the relationship of patient distance to hospital of treatment on mortality trends after surgery, since patients often travel large distances to referral centers.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study of the NCDB from 2004 to 2013 was performed, and patients with gastrointestinal, melanoma, and head and neck primary site tumors who underwent surgery were included. We excluded cases with no recorded mortality status or distance from the hospital. A multivariable logistic regression was conducted with adjustments for population density, treating facility location, age, race, gender, education, income, insurance, comorbidities (Charlson-Deyo score), days from diagnosis to treatment, positive margin, tumor stage and grade, and lymph or vascular invasion.

RESULTS

A total of 1 424 482 patients were included. Overall median distance to hospital was 9.7 miles (range 4.2-23.7 miles); 696 647 (48.91%) of the sample traveled a distance greater than 10 miles to the institution where the procedure was performed. The multivariable regression analysis demonstrated overall lower mortality for those patients travelling a longer distance to care for multiple tumor types, including: liver (OR .87, .77-.99, P = .032), pancreas (OR .82, .76-.89, P < .001), colon (OR .92, .89-.95, P < .001), rectum (OR .90, .83-.96, P = .003), melanoma (OR .83, .79-.88, P < .001), and tumors of the larynx (OR .80, .69-.94, P = .005).

DISCUSSION

Increased distance traveled for surgical treatment has a significant correlation with decreased odds of mortality for multiple cancers, highlighting the importance of centralized referral patterns for oncology care.

Travel distance and its interaction with patient and hospital factors in pancreas cancer care

BACKGROUND

Although volume-outcome literature supports regionalization for complex procedures, travel may be burdensome. We assessed the relationship between overall survival and travel distance for patients undergoing pancreatic resection for adenocarcinoma.

METHODS

We analyzed the Fall 2018 National Cancer Database Public Use File. We defined distance traveled as a categorical variable (<12.5 miles, 12.5-50mi, and >50mi). We analyzed overall survival (OS) as a function of distance traveled using the log rank test and Cox proportional hazards models; we estimated stratified models to assess for interaction between distance and other relevant covariates.

RESULTS

In adjusted analysis of 39,089 patients, greater distance was associated with decreased OS (p = 0.0029). We found interactions between distance and center type, comorbidities, and age. Distance traveled was a negative factor for patients treated at low-volume academic centers (but not high-volume academic or non-academic centers). Additionally, distance traveled was a negative factor for OS in young, healthy patients but not geriatric, ill patients.

CONCLUSION

Traveling more than 12.5 miles for pancreatic resection was associated with worse OS. Prior to regionalization, evaluation of local resources may be necessary.

Contribution of Geographic Location to Disparities in Ovarian Cancer Treatment

BACKGROUND

More than 14,000 women in the United States die of ovarian cancer (OC) every year. Disparities in survival have been observed by race and socioeconomic status (SES), and vary spatially even after adjusting for treatment received. This study aimed to determine the impact of geographic location on receiving treatment adherent to the NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology (NCCN Guidelines) for OC, independent of other predictors.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Women diagnosed with all stages of epithelial OC (1996-2014) were identified through the California Cancer Registry. Generalized additive models, smoothing for residential location, were used to calculate adjusted odds ratios (ORs) and 95% CIs for receiving nonadherent care throughout California. We assessed the impact of distance traveled for care, distance to closest high-quality hospital, race/ethnicity, and SES on receipt of quality care, adjusting for demographic and cancer characteristics and stratifying by disease stage.

RESULTS

Of 29,844 patients with OC, 11,419 (38.3%) received guideline-adherent care. ORs for nonadherent care were lower in northern California and higher in Kern and Los Angeles counties. Magnitudes of associations with location varied by stage (OR range, 0.45-2.19). Living farther from a high-quality hospital increased the odds of receiving nonadherent care (OR, 1.18; 95% CI, 1.07-1.29), but travel >32 km to receive care was associated with decreased odds (OR, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.70-0.84). American Indian/other women were more likely to travel greater distances to receive care. Women in the highest SES quintile, those with Medicare insurance, and women of non-Hispanic black race were less likely to travel far. Patients who were Asian/Pacific Islander lived the closest to a high-quality hospital.

CONCLUSIONS

Among California women diagnosed with OC, living closer to a high-quality center was associated with receiving adherent care. Non-Hispanic black women were less likely to receive adherent care, and women with lower SES lived farthest from high-quality hospitals. Geographic location in California is an independent predictor of adherence to NCCN Guidelines for OC.

Predictive factors for utilization of a low-volume center in pancreatic surgery: A nationwide study

STUDY OBJECTIVE

It has been demonstrated that mortality following pancreatectomy is correlated with surgical volume. However, up until now, no French study has focused on predictive factors to undergo pancreatectomy in low-volume centers. The objective of this study is to analyze the clinical characteristics, socio-economic status and medical density according to surgical volume and to analyze predictive factors for undergoing pancreatectomy in low-volume centers.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

All patients who underwent pancreatectomy in France from 2012 to 2015 were identified fromthe PMSI database. Hopsitals were classified as low, intermediate and high volume (<10, 11-19, ≥20 resections/year, respectively). Clinical and socioeconomic data, travel distance and rurality were assesed to identify factors associated with undergoing pancreatectomy at low-volume hospitals.

RESULTS

In overall, 12,333 patients were included. Those who underwent pancreatectomy in low-volume centers were more likely older, had high Charlson comorbidity index (CCI), had low socioeconomic status, and resided in rural locations.distance traveled by patients operated on in low-volume centers was significantly shorter (23 vs. 61km, P<0.001). In multivariable analysis, older age (P=0.04), CCI≥4 (P=0.008), short travel distance (P<0.001), low socio-economic status (P<0.001) and rurality (P<0.001) were associated withundergoing pancreatectomy in low-volume centers.

CONCLUSION

Patients continue to undergo pancreatectomy at low-volume hospitals is due not only to clinical parameters, but also to socioeconomic and environmental factors. These factors should be taken into account in process of pancreatic surgery centralization.

Non-Hispanic Blacks undergoing distal pancreatectomy have higher risk-adjusted rates of morbidity and are more likely to be high-cost outliers

BACKGROUND

Few studies evaluate racial disparities in costs and clinical outcomes for patients undergoing distal pancreatectomy (DP).

METHODS

We queried the Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project State Inpatient Databases to identify patients undergoing DP. Multivariable regression (MVR) was used to evaluate the association between race and postoperative outcomes.

RESULTS

2,493 patients underwent DP; 265 (10%) were black, and 221 (8%) were of Hispanic ethnicity. On MVR, black and Hispanic patients were less likely than whites to undergo surgery in high volume centers (OR 0.53, 95% CI [0.40, 0.71]; OR 0.45, 95% CI [0.32, 0.62]). Black patients had a greater risk of postoperative complication (OR 1.40, 95% CI [1.07, 1.83]), 90-day readmission (OR 1.53, 95% CI [1.15, 2.02]), prolonged length of stay (OR 1.74, 95% CI [1.25-2.44]), and of being a high cost outliers (OR 1.40, 95% CI [1.02, 1.91]) compared to white patients.

CONCLUSION

Black patients have increased risk of having a postoperative complication, prolonged hospitalization, and of being a high-cost outlier than non-Hispanic whites.

Travel to a high volume hospital to undergo resection of gallbladder cancer: does it impact quality of care and long-term outcomes?

BACKGROUND

The relationship of volume and travel distance to patient outcomes after resection of gallbladder cancer (GBC) remains poorly defined.

METHODS

The 2004-2015 National Cancer Database was used to identify GBC resection patients and examine the impact of travel distance, hospital volume and both on overall survival (OS) and quality of care indicators.

RESULTS

Among 10,174 patients undergoing surgery for GBC, the majority of patients were Caucasian (N = 8,175, 80%) and had a Charlson-Deyo comorbidity score of 0 (N = 6,785, 67%). On unadjusted survival analysis increasing travel distance and hospital volume were associated with improved OS (both p < 0.001). After controlling for competing risk factors, the 4th quartile of hospital volume was associated with a decreased hazard of death (HR 0.831, 95% CI 0.751-0.920, p < 0.001). When both hospital volume and travel distance were included, the association with improved OS persisted only for hospital volume (4th quartile HR 0.835, 95% CI 0.753-0.925, p < 0.001), whereas there was no independent association of increasing travel distance with OS.

CONCLUSIONS

Both increasing travel distance and hospital volume were associated with improved OS; however, adjusted models demonstrated that the impact of travel distance was mediated through hospital volume.

Distance Traveled to Head and Neck Cancer Provider: A Measure of Socioeconomic Status and Access

Objective

Improved head and neck cancer survival has been associated with traveling farther distances for treatment, potentially due to patients seeking higher-quality facilities. This study investigates the role of both facility and confounding patient factors on this relationship.

Study Design

Review of national registry data.

Setting

National Cancer Database.

Subjects and Methods

Adults with head and neck cancer diagnosed from 2004 to 2014 were identified. Overall survival was compared among distance-to-facility quartiles via univariate and multivariate survival models. Then, the analysis was stratified by facility and patient factors, and the association between distance and survival was compared among strata.

Results

Overall survival was worst in the shortest-distance quartile (<5 miles; median survival, 80.7 months; 95% CI, 79.2-82.3), while other distance groups showed similar survival (range, 96.4-104 months). This finding remained in the multivariate model (adjusted hazard ratio vs first distance quartile: 0.88; 95% CI, 0.87-0.89). The association between survival and distance persisted in all subgroups when stratified by facility volume and type (adjusted hazard ratio range, 0.82-0.91), suggesting that facility quality does not fully account for this association. When stratified by income, distance remained statistically associated with survival but with a smaller effect size than that of income.

Conclusion

The association between distance to treating facility and head and neck cancer survival is limited to patients with worse survival outcomes living within 5 miles of the facility and is not fully explained by measures of facility quality.

Accessing surgical care for pancreaticoduodenectomy: Patient variation in travel distance and choice to bypass hospitals to reach higher volume centers

BACKGROUND

While better outcomes at high-volume surgical centers have driven regionalization of complex surgical care, access to high-volume centers often requires travel over longer distances. We sought to evaluate travel patterns of patients undergoing pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) for pancreatic cancer to assess willingness of patients to travel for surgical care.

METHODS

The California Office of Statewide Health Planning database was used to identify patients who underwent PD between 2005 and 2016. Total distance traveled, as well as whether a patient bypassed the nearest hospital that performed PD to get to a higher-volume center was assessed. Multivariate analyses were used to identify factors associated with bypassing a local hospital for a higher-volume center.

RESULTS

Among 23 014 patients who underwent PD, individuals traveled a median distance of 18.0 miles to get to a hospital that performed PD. The overwhelming majority (84%) of patients bypassed the nearest providing hospital and traveled a median additional 16.6 miles to their destination hospital. Among patients who bypassed the nearest hospital, 13,269 (68.6%) did so for a high-volume destination hospital. Specifically, average annual PD volume at the nearest "bypassed" vs final destination hospital was 29.6 vs 56 cases, respectively. Outcomes at bypassed vs destination hospitals varied (incidence of complications: 39.2% vs 32.4%; failure-to-rescue: 14.5% vs 9.1%). PD at a high-volume center was associated with lower mortality (OR = 0.46 95% CI, 0.22-0.95). High-volume PD ( > 20 cases) was predictive of hospital bypass (OR = 3.8 95% CI, 3.3-4.4). Among patients who had surgery at a low-volume center, nearly 20% bypassed a high-volume hospital in route. Furthermore, among patients who did not bypass a high-volume hospital, one-third would have needed to travel only an additional 30 miles or less to reach the nearest high-volume hospital.

CONCLUSION

Most patients undergoing PD bypassed the nearest providing hospital to seek care at a higher-volume hospital. While these data reflect increased regionalization of complex surgical care, nearly 1 in 5 patients still underwent PD at a low-volume center.

Evaluating Dissemination of Adequate Lymphadenectomy for Gastric Cancer in the USA

BACKGROUND

Adequate lymphadenectomy (AL) of 15+ lymph nodes comprises an important component of gastric cancer surgical therapy. Despite endorsement by the National Comprehensive Cancer Network and the Committee on Cancer, initial adoption of this paradigm has been relatively slow. The current analysis sought to perform an adjusted time-trend evaluation of the factors associated with AL and its dissemination.

METHODS

Utilizing the 2004-2015 National Cancer Database, 28,985 patients were identified who underwent gastrectomy for adenocarcinoma. An adjusted time-trend analysis was performed to estimate the adoption of AL overall. Multivariable logistic regression was utilized to assess factors associated with these observed trends. Interactions and stratified models determined disparate effects in vulnerable populations (older adults, ethnic minorities, low socioeconomic status).

RESULTS

The adjusted time-trend analysis demonstrated an overall 30% increase (28.8 to 58.7%) in receipt of AL (OR 1.10 increase/year; 95%CI 1.09-1.10) from 2004 to 2015. This trend persisted even after stratifying the models by age, race/ethnicity, and income (OR 1.07-1.12; p < 0.05). Slowest rates of adoption were seen amongst hospitals in the Midwest census region (OR 1.08, CI 1.06-1.90) and comprehensive community hospitals (OR 1.08, CI 1.06-1.91) and with African-American patients (OR 1.09, CI 1.06-1.11) (all p < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

This multi-center evaluation demonstrates increased adoption of AL during gastric cancer surgery in the USA overall and amongst vulnerable populations, although regional and racial disparities were observed. Future studies are needed to investigate reasons underlying racial and regional differences in receipt of AL.

Effect of Travel Time for Thyroid Surgery on Treatment Cost and Morbidity

Regionalizing surgical care to high-volume centers has improved outcomes for endocrine surgery. This shift is associated with increased travel time, costs, and morbidity within certain patient populations. We examined travel time–related differences in demographics, health-care utilization, thyroid-specific disease, and cost for patients undergoing thyroid surgery at a single high-volume center. Data were extracted from the 2005 to 2014 ACS-NSQIP and clinical data repository for patients undergoing thyroid surgery. Travel times between patients’ home address and the hospital were calculated using Google Earth under assumptions of standard road conditions and speed restrictions. Travel time was divided into <2 hours versus ≥2 hours. Primary outcomes were hospital cost and 30-day morbidity. Factors associated with travel time and primary outcomes were analyzed using appropriate bivariate tests and multivariable regression modeling. A total of 1046 thyroid procedures were included, with median (IQR) travel time of 68.8 (40.1–107.2) minutes. Eight hundred forty-seven (80.9%) patients traveled <2 hours compared with 199 (19.1%) traveled ≥2 hours. Patients traveling ≥2 hours were more likely to have complex thyroid disease (37.7% vs 27.6%, P = 0.005), uninsured status (31.1% vs 11.8%, P < 0.001), lower preoperative morbidity risk (2.3% vs 2.7%, P = 0.02), and longer length of stay (1.21 vs 1.07 days, P = 0.04), but similar median operative times (163 vs 165 minutes, P = 0.89). Average cost was higher for patients traveling ≥2 hours ($7300 vs $6846 [2014 USD], P = 0.05). Despite observed patient differences, hospital costs and postoperative morbidity did not differ after adjustment. Existing management practices and the nature of the disease process may be protective against the potential negative effects of regionalization.

Travel distance and regional access to cardiac valve surgery

OBJECTIVE

Evidence in other surgical subspecialties suggests patients traveling farther to undergo surgery have worse outcomes. We sought to determine the impact of travel distance and travel beyond closest center on outcomes after valve surgery.

METHODS

Patients who underwent valve surgery ±CABG with a Society of Thoracic Surgeons (STS) predicted risk and zip code were extracted from a statewide STS database (2011-016). Patients were stratified by those receiving care greater than or equal to 20 miles from the closest surgical center (Traveler) or at the closest center (Non-Traveler). Multivariate logistic regression assessed the effects of travel distance and traveler status on mortality and major morbidity adjusted for STS predicted risk, median income by zip code, and payer status.

RESULTS

Median travel distance for all patients (n = 4765) was 19 miles and after risk-adjustment increasing distance was associated with reduced operative mortality (odds ratio [OR], 0.94 [0.89-1.00], P = .049) with no impact on major morbidity. Travelers (445 patients, 9.3%) had lower median income, higher self-pay and reoperative status, but similar urgent/emergent status and STS risk as Non-Travelers. Travelers had lower operative mortality (1.6% vs 4.3%, P = .005) which remained statistically lower after risk-adjustment (OR, 0.32 [0.14-0.75], P = .009). This mortality difference was particularly pronounced in patients with postoperative complications (3.1% vs 7.9%, P = .005).

CONCLUSIONS

Contrary to other surgical subspecialties, farther travel distance and bypassing the nearest surgical center were associated with lower rates of operative mortality and failure to rescue. Either referral patterns or financials reasons may result in Travelers ending up at high performing centers that prevent escalation of complications.

Travel distance affects rates and reasons for inpatient visits after pancreatectomy

BACKGROUND

Centralization of complex surgical care leads to increased travel distances for patients. We sought to determine if increased travel distance to the index hospital altered inpatient Visit rates following pancreatectomy.

METHODS

Pancreatectomies from 2013-2016 were reviewed retrospectively from a single high-volume institution. Travel distance for 936 patients was determined, and patients were grouped by 50-mile increments. Visits (Observations or Readmissions) and corresponding reasons were gathered.

RESULTS

222 patients (23.7%) had a Visit to any hospital (AH) within 90 days postoperative; 195 (87.8%) were to the index hospital (IH). The <50 miles group had the highest Visit rate to AH (28.6% vs. 17.8% vs. 24.6%; P = 0.008) and the IH (26.9% vs. 15.2% vs. 20.6%; P = 0.002) compared to 50-100 and > 100 miles. This trend was statistically significant for Observations, but not Readmissions. Gastrointestinal (GI) complaints alone led to 20.7% patients requiring Visits to AH at 90-days, mostly in <50miles group for Visits and Observations at AH and IH.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients closest to the IH had the highest Visit and Observation rate following pancreatectomy without affecting Readmission rate, with GI complaints as a driving factor. Inpatient education and outpatient symptom management may reduce repeat hospitalization.

Outcomes After Resection of Hepatocellular Carcinoma: Intersection of Travel Distance and Hospital Volume

BACKGROUND

Data on the impact of hospital volume and travel distance on patient outcomes after major abdominal surgery remain poorly defined. We sought to characterize the relationship of travel distance, hospital volume, and long-term outcomes of patients undergoing surgical resection of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC).

METHODS

The 2004-2015 National Cancer Database was used to identify patients who underwent resection of HCC. Patients were stratified according to travel distance and hospital volume quartiles, and multivariable regression models were utilized to examine the impact of travel distance, hospital volume, and travel distance/hospital volume on overall survival (OS).

RESULTS

Among the 12,266 patients identified, procedures included wedge/segmental resections (N = 7354, 59.9%), hemi-hepatectomy (N = 4003, 32.6%), and extended hepatectomy (N = 909, 7.5%). Stratifying data into quartiles, travel distance to surgical care was ≤ 5.7 miles (mi), > 5.7-14.2 mi, > 14.2-44.4 mi, and ≥ 44.4 mi, while hospital volume quartiles determined on the hospital level were ≤ 1 case per year, 1.1-4, 4.1-12.5, and ≥ 12.5. On multivariable analysis, increased hospital volume was associated with decreased hazard of mortality (HR 0.69, 95% CI 0.45-0.82, p < 0.001). Travel distance was not significantly associated with hazard of mortality. Furthermore, only hospital volume was associated with mortality (HR 0.67, 95% CI 0.56-0.80, p < 0.001) after controlling for both travel distance and hospital volume.

CONCLUSIONS

Only hospital volume was associated with increased hazard of mortality. The benefits of undergoing resection for HCC at a high-volume hospital appear to outweigh the inconvenience of longer travel distances.

Association Between Travel Distance, Hospital Volume, and Outcomes Following Resection of Cholangiocarcinoma

BACKGROUND

The objective of the current study was to characterize the association between travel distance/hospital volume relative to outcomes following resection of cholangiocarcinoma.

METHODS

Patients were identified using the 2004-2015 National Cancer Database and stratified into quartiles according to travel distance/hospital volume. Multivariable regression models were utilized to examine the impact of travel distance and hospital volume on quality-of-care metrics and overall survival.

RESULTS

Among 5125 patients, the majority of patients had T1/2 (N = 2006, 41.1%) and N0 disease (N = 2498, 50.9%). Median hospital quartile surgical volumes in cases/year were low volume (LV) 6, intermediate low volume (ILV) 7, intermediate high volume (IHV) 12, and high volume (HV) 24 cases/year. Median travel distance quartiles in miles were short travel (ST) 2.7, intermediate short travel (IST) 7.9, intermediate long travel (ILT) 18.9, and long travel (LT) 84.7. Longer travel distances were associated with better overall survival, as every 10 miles was associated with a 2% decrease in mortality (p = 0.02). Differences in quality-of-care metrics were largely mediated through travel distance.

CONCLUSIONS

Travel distance and hospital volume were associated with certain quality-of-care metrics among patients with cholangiocarcinoma. After controlling for hospital volume and travel distance simultaneously, only travel distance was associated with decreased risk of mortality.

Surgical Delay Is Associated with Improved Survival in Hepatocellular Carcinoma: Results of the National Cancer Database

BACKGROUND

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is one of the fastest growing causes of cancer-related death in the USA. Studies that investigated the impact of HCC therapeutic delays are limited to single centers, and no large-scale database research has been conducted. This study investigated the association of surgical delay and survival in HCC patients.

METHODS

Patients underwent local tumor destruction and hepatic resection for stages I-III HCC were identified from the 2004 to 2013 Commission on Cancer's National Cancer Database. Surgical delay was defined as > 60 days from the date of diagnosis to surgery. Generalized linear-mixed model assessed the demographic and clinical factors associated with delay, and frailty Cox proportional hazard analysis examined the prognostic factors for overall survival.

RESULTS

A total of 12,102 HCC patients met the eligibility criteria. Median wait time to surgery was 50 days (interquartile range, 29-86), and 4987 patients (41.2%) had surgical delay. Delayed patients demonstrated better 5-year survival for local tumor destruction (29.1 vs. 27.6%; P = .001) and resection (44.1 vs. 41.0%; P = .007). Risk-adjusted model indicated that delayed patients had a 7% decreased risk of death (HR, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.87-0.99; P = .027). Similar findings were also observed using other wait time cutoffs at 50, 70, 80, 90, and 100 days.

CONCLUSIONS

A plausible explanation of this finding may be case prioritization, in which patients with more severe and advanced disease who were at higher risk of death received earlier surgery, while patients with less-aggressive tumors were operated on later and received more comprehensive preoperative evaluation.

Regionalization of Retroperitoneal Sarcoma Surgery to High-Volume Hospitals: Missed Opportunities for Outcome Improvement

PURPOSE:

Surgery continues to be the dominant therapy for the management of retroperitoneal soft-tissue sarcoma (RPS). Many groups advocate performing these resections at high-volume hospitals (HVHs), given their complexity. We therefore sought to explore whether RPS surgery has indeed begun to regionalize to HVHs in the same manner as pancreatic cancer (PC) surgery during the last decade.

METHODS:

We identified 70,763 patients who underwent surgical resection for RPS or PC using the National Cancer Database (2004 to 2015). Patients were stratified by hospital surgical volume. We performed an adjusted time trend analysis to compare trends in performance of surgery at HVHs for RPS versus PC. Multivariable logistic analyses were then performed, controlling for covariables, to elucidate relationships between patient-, hospital-, and treatment-related variables that may contribute to these observed trends.

RESULTS:

Only 9.6% of patients underwent RPS surgery at HVHs. During this time period, the odds ratio of undergoing RPS compared with pancreatectomy at HVHs was 0.65 ( P < .05). Time trend analysis estimated that whereas both procedures are regionalizing, the rate of RPS regionalization grew at 30.5% of the rate of PC (1.017 v 1.056; P < .001) and remained consistent after using several hospital volume thresholds and hospital volume as a continuous variable.

CONCLUSION:

Results from this retrospective multi-institutional analysis uncovered a lag in the regionalization of surgery for RPS compared with PC surgery. These findings reinforce the call to regionalize surgery for RPS to HVHs in a manner that is similar to that of other procedures in complex cancer surgery.

Treatment strategies and clinical outcomes of locally advanced pancreatic cancer patients treated at high-volume facilities and academic centers

Purpose

Locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC) treatment has varying practice patterns with poor outcomes. We investigated treatment using single-agent chemotherapy and multiagent chemotherapy (MAC) with or without radiation therapy (RT) at high-volume facilities (HVFs) and academic centers (ACs).

Methods and Materials

The National Cancer Database was used to obtain data on 10,139 patients with LAPC. HVF was defined as the top 5% of facilities per number of patients treated at each facility. Univariate and multivariable (MVA) analysis Cox regressions were performed to identify the impact of HVF, AC, MAC, and RT on overall survival (OS).

Results

The median age of patients was 66 years (range, 22-90); 50.1% were male and 49.9% female. Of the patients, 46.1% received MAC, 53.8% received single-agent chemotherapy, 45.7% received RT, 54.3% did not receive RT, and 5% underwent surgical resection. The median follow-up was 48.8 months. On MVA, treatment at HVFs and ACs remained significantly associated with improved OS, with a hazard ratio (HR) of 0.84 (P < .001) and 0.94 (P = .004), respectively. The median OS for HVF treatment compared with low-volume facilities was 14.3 versus 11.2 months, respectively (P < .001). The median OS for AC treatment versus non-AC was 12.1 versus 10.8 months, respectively (P < .001). Additionally, on MVA, receipt of RT and MAC remained significantly associated with improved OS (HR: 0.76; P < .001; and HR: 0.73; P < .001, respectively). MVA for receipt of surgery showed that MAC is a significant predictor for receiving surgery (odds ratio: 1.29; P = .009).

Conclusions

Our results build on a growing literature supporting RT and MAC in treating LAPC. Additionally, we believe that-in the absence of prospective data-this makes a strong case for considering MAC with RT at ACs and HVFs for treating LAPC.

Travel distance: Impact on stage of presentation and treatment choices in head and neck cancer

OBJECTIVES

The objective was to examine the impact of travel distance on stage of presentation and treatment choices in head and neck squamous cell carcinoma in the rural setting.

METHODS

6029 cases diagnosed from 2002 to 2011 were obtained from the state cancer registry. Travel time was calculated to the nearest academic medical centers, otolaryngologist, and radiation treatment facilities. Multivariate logistic regression was used to examine the association of travel time with stage of presentation as well as the likelihood of appropriate therapy after adjustment for other demographic variables.

RESULTS

Patients in the highest quartile for travel distance to academic centers were 33% more likely to present with early stage disease (p = 0.02), and 42% more likely to receive appropriate surgical therapy for oral cavity cancer. Patients were 70% more likely to receive appropriate surgery if they were farthest from the nearest radiation center (p = 0.03). Proximity to otolaryngology care was not significant.

CONCLUSION

Increased travel distance to academic medical centers is associated with increased likelihood of proper therapy for surgically treated tumors of the head and neck. Impact on these findings on improvements in access to care is discussed.

Health Disparities Impact Expected Treatment of Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma Nationally

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

National adherence to treatment guidelines for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is a concern. This study aims to evaluate national expected treatment (ET) adherence for all PDAC stages. We hypothesized that both patient and hospital demographics are associated with national ET disparities for PDAC.

METHODS

Clinical stage I through IV PDAC patients were evaluated using the National Cancer Data Base from 2004 to 2013. ET was defined as surgery for stage I/II, chemotherapy or radiation for stage III, and chemotherapy for stage IV. Unexpected treatment (UT) was defined as no surgery for stage I/II, surgery for stage III, and radiation or surgery for stage IV. No treatment is denoted by NT.

RESULTS

171,351 patients were identified, of whom 56,589 (33.0%) were stage I/II, 23,459 (13.7%) were stage III, and 91,303 (53.3%) were stage IV. Of patients, 48.4% received ET, 14.7% received UT, and 36.9% received NT. ET rates were 41.1% for stage I/II, 65.4% for stage III, and 48.5% for stage IV patients. On multivariable analysis, older age, non-White race, lower socioeconomic status, being uninsured or Medicaid, increased comorbidities, nonacademic centers, and low-volume hospitals were independent negative predictors of receiving ET (P < 0.01). On subgroup analysis, high-volume academic centers had similar negative predictors of ET despite higher ET adherence overall (P < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

Patient and hospital factors impact ET of PDAC on a national level. These treatment disparities for PDAC are concerning, even at high-volume academic centers. Future studies need to identify the causes of treatment disparities for PDAC with intervention measures aimed to relieve treatment disparities.

Racial and Ethnic Disparities in Travel for Head and Neck Cancer Treatment and the Impact of Travel Distance on Survival

BACKGROUND

Patients who travel a long distance (≥50 miles) for cancer care have improved outcomes. However, to the authors' knowledge, the prevalence of long travel distances for treatment by patients with head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC), and the effect of travel distance on overall survival (OS), remains unknown.

METHODS

The authors used the National Cancer Data base from 2004 through 2013 to identify patients with HNSCC undergoing definitive treatment. Travel distance for treatment was categorized as short (<12.5 miles), intermediate (12.5-49.9 miles), and long (50-249.9 miles). The primary outcome, OS, was evaluated using Cox shared-frailty modeling. A secondary outcome, factors associated with intermediate and long travel distances, was evaluated using multivariable hierarchical logistic regression.

RESULTS

Among 118,000 patients with HNSCC, 62,753 (53.2%), 40,644 (34.4%), and 14,603 (12.4%) patients, respectively, traveled short, intermediate, and long distances for treatment. After adjusting for relevant covariates, long travel distance was associated with treatment at academic and high-volume centers. Patients of black race, of Hispanic ethnicity, with Medicaid insurance, and who were treated with nonsurgical treatment were less likely to travel long distances for treatment (P<.001). Traveling a long distance for treatment was associated with improved OS on multivariable analysis (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.93; 95% confidence interval, 0.89-0.96) compared with a short distance.

CONCLUSIONS

Traveling a long distance for HNSCC treatment is associated with improved survival, especially for patients receiving nonsurgical management. Racial and ethnic disparities in travel for HNSCC treatment exist. As regionalization of care continues, future work should identify and address reasons for racial and ethnic disparities in travel that may prevent access to care at high-volume facilities. Cancer 2018;000:000-000. © 2018 American Cancer Society.