Short-term survival analysis of a risk-adjusted model for ovarian cancer care

OBJECTIVE

To quantify the impact on short-term ovarian cancer survival associated with treatment at high-performing hospitals using the observed-to-expected ratio (O/E) for adherence to ovarian cancer treatment guidelines as a risk-adjusted measure of hospital quality care.

METHODS

This was a retrospective population-based study of stage I-IV invasive epithelial ovarian cancer reported to California Cancer Registry 1996-2017. A fit logistic regression model, risk-adjusted for patient and disease characteristics, was used to calculate O/E for each hospital stratified by hospital annual case volume. Cox proportional hazards model was used for survival analyses at 3, 6, 12, 24 months and stratified according to sociodemographic characteristics.

RESULTS

The study population included 35,725 subjects treated at 443 hospitals: Low-O/E - 26.4% of cases; Intermediate-O/E - 55.5% of cases; and High-O/E - 18.1% of cases. Overall median survival by hospital category was: High-O/E = 72.5 months (95% CI = 68.6-78.6 months), Intermediate-O/E = 68.6 months (95% CI = 65.9-71.6 months), Low-O/E = 47.0 months (95% CI = 44.2-49.2 months). Initial treatment at a High-O/E hospital (HR = 1.00) was a statistically significant and independent predictor of improved short-term survival compared to Low-O/E hospitals at 3 months (HR = 1.46, 95% CI = 1.29-1.65), 6 months (HR = 1.35, 95% CI = 1.22-1.50), 12 months (HR = 1.27, 95% CI = 1.17-1.38), and 24 months (HR = 1.19, 95% CI = 1.11-1.27). Significant and independent associations between improved sort-term survival and High/O/E care were observed for Whites, Hispanics, Asian/Pacific Islanders (A/PI), across SES strata, and among all payer categories.

CONCLUSION

Ovarian cancer care at a High-O/E hospital is an independent predictor of improved outcome and the survival advantage is disproportionately weighted toward the short-term time horizon following diagnosis.

Population-Based Analysis of National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) Guideline Adherence for Patients with Anal Squamous Cell Carcinoma in California

PURPOSE

We analyzed adherence to the National Comprehensive Cancer Network treatment guidelines for anal squamous cell carcinoma in California and the associated impacts on survival.

METHODS

This was a retrospective study of patients in the California Cancer Registry aged 18 to 79 years with recent diagnoses of anal squamous cell carcinoma. Predefined criteria were used to determine adherence. Adjusted odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals were estimated for those receiving adherent care. Disease-specific survival (DSS) and overall survival (OS) were examined with a Cox proportional hazards model.

RESULTS

4740 patients were analyzed. Female sex was positively associated with adherent care. Medicaid status and low socioeconomic status were negatively associated with adherent care. Non-adherent care was associated with worse OS (Adjusted HR 1.87, 95% CI = 1.66, 2.12, p < 0.0001). DSS was worse in patients receiving non-adherent care (Adjusted HR 1.96, 95% CI = 1.56, 2.46, p < 0.0001). Female sex was associated with improved DSS and OS. Black race, Medicare/Medicaid, and low socioeconomic status were associated with worse OS.

CONCLUSIONS

Male patients, those with Medicaid insurance, or those with low socioeconomic status are less likely to receive adherent care. Adherent care was associated with improved DSS and OS in anal carcinoma patients.

Patient and Provider Perspectives on Barriers to Accessing Gynecologic Oncologists for Ovarian Cancer Surgical Care

Objective:

National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guidelines recommend that patients with ovarian cancer receive surgical care from a gynecologic oncologist. However, 15%–30% of patients with ovarian cancer do not receive surgical care from this specialist. The reasons for this remain unknown. We aim at assessing the barriers and attitudes perceived by patients with ovarian cancer who did not receive their primary surgery from a gynecologic oncologist and by diagnosing providers in an exploratory qualitative study.

Materials and Methods:

Patients and providers were sampled through the Iowa Cancer Registry. Participants were interviewed by telephone about barriers that patients face receiving surgical care from a specialist. Interviews were transcribed verbatim, and thematic analysis was completed by two team members.

Findings:

Providers (n = 10, 13% participation rate) identified many system-level barriers, including poor provider-to-provider communication, long time-to-surgery wait times, and a limited number of gynecologic oncologists working in their referral range. Patients (n = 16, 38% participation rate) denied system-level barriers; however, no patients reported receiving a referral to a gynecologic oncologist. This, in and of itself, constitutes a system-level barrier. Providers identified many barriers that their patients face, whereas patients failed to identify these barriers and denied facing them. Patients described the shock that they experienced after diagnosis and its limitations on their decision-making process. Both providers and patients agreed that the providers were influential in determining care decisions.

Discussion:

There is a divergence in the perceptions of barriers to care between providers and patients. Open discussions are needed about options and clinical guidelines for surgical ovarian cancer care. Further research is needed to develop and evaluate mechanisms to improve provider-to-patient discussions about surgical recommendations.

A Risk-Adjusted Model for Ovarian Cancer Care and Disparities in Access to High-Performing Hospitals

Ovarian cancer care at a high-performing hospital is an independent predictor of improved survival, and barriers to access disproportionately affect patients according to sociodemographic characteristics.

OBJECTIVE:

To validate the observed/expected ratio for adherence to ovarian cancer treatment guidelines as a risk-adjusted measure of hospital quality care, and to identify patient characteristics associated with disparities in access to high-performing hospitals.

METHODS:

This was a retrospective population-based study of stage I–IV invasive epithelial ovarian cancer reported to the California Cancer Registry between 1996 and 2014. A fit logistic regression model, which was risk-adjusted for patient and disease characteristics, was used to calculate the observed/expected ratio for each hospital, stratified by hospital annual case volume. A Cox proportional hazards model was used for survival analyses, and a multivariable logistic regression model was used to identify independent predictors of access to high-performing hospitals.

RESULTS:

The study population included 30,051 patients who were treated at 426 hospitals: low observed/expected ratio (n=304) 23.5% of cases; intermediate observed/expected ratio (n=92) 57.8% of cases; and high observed/expected ratio (n=30) 18.7% of cases. Hospitals with high observed/expected ratios were significantly more likely to deliver guideline-adherent care (53.3%), compared with hospitals with intermediate (37.8%) and low (27.5%) observed/expected ratios (P<.001). Median disease-specific survival time ranged from 73.0 months for hospitals with high observed/expected ratios to 48.1 months for hospitals with low observed/expected ratios (P<.001). Treatment at a hospital with a high observed/expected ratio was an independent predictor of superior survival compared with hospitals with intermediate (hazard ratio [HR] 1.06, 95% CI 1.01–1.11, P<.05) and low (HR 1.10, 95% CI 1.04–1.16, P<.001) observed/expected ratios. Being of Hispanic ethnicity (odds ratio [OR] 0.85, 95% CI 0.78–0.93, P<.001, compared with white), having Medicare insurance (OR 0.74, 95% CI 0.68–0.81 P<.001, compared with managed care), having a Charlson Comorbidity Index score of 2 or greater (OR 0.91, 95% CI 0.83–0.99, P<.05), and being of lower socioeconomic status (lowest quintile OR 0.41, 95% CI 0.36–0.46, P<.001, compared with highest quintile) were independent negative predictors of access to a hospital with a high observed/expected ratio.

CONCLUSION:

Ovarian cancer care at a hospital with a high observed/expected ratio is an independent predictor of improved survival. Barriers to high-performing hospitals disproportionately affect patients according to sociodemographic characteristics. Triage of patients with suspected ovarian cancer according to a performance-based observed/expected ratio hospital classification is a potential mechanism for expanded access to expert care.