Geographic distance to Commission on Cancer-accredited and nonaccredited hospitals in the United States.

PURPOSE: The Commission on Cancer (CoC) establishes standards to support multidisciplinary, comprehensive cancer care. CoC-accredited cancer programs diagnose and/or treat 73% of patients in the United States. However, rural patients may experience diminished access to CoC-accredited cancer programs. Our study evaluated distance to hospitals by CoC accreditation status, rurality, and Census Division. METHODS: All US hospitals were identified from public-use Homeland Infrastructure Foundation-Level Data, then merged with CoC-accreditation data. Rural-Urban Continuum Codes (RUCC) were used to categorize counties as metro (RUCC 1-3), large rural (RUCC 4-6), or small rural (RUCC 7-9). Distance from each county centroid to the nearest CoC and non-CoC hospital was calculated using the Great Circle Distance method in ArcGIS. FINDINGS: Of 1,382 CoC-accredited hospitals, 89% were in metro counties. Small rural counties contained a total of 30 CoC and 794 non-CoC hospitals. CoC hospitals were located 4.0, 10.1, and 11.5 times farther away than non-CoC hospitals for residents of metro, large rural, and small rural counties, respectively, while the average distance to non-CoC hospitals was similar across groups (9.4-13.6 miles). Distance to CoC-accredited facilities was greatest west of the Mississippi River, in particular the Mountain Division (99.2 miles). CONCLUSIONS: Despite similar proximity to non-CoC hospitals across groups, CoC hospitals are located farther from large and small rural counties than metro counties, suggesting rural patients have diminished access to multidisciplinary, comprehensive cancer care afforded by CoC-accredited hospitals. Addressing distance-based access barriers to high-quality, comprehensive cancer treatment in rural US communities will require a multisectoral approach.

Rural comprehensive cancer care: Qualitative analysis of current challenges and opportunities.

PURPOSE: While limited resources can make high-quality, comprehensive, coordinated cancer care provision challenging in rural settings, rural cancer patients often rely on local hospitals for care. To develop resources and strategies to support high-quality local cancer care, it is critical to understand the current experiences of rural cancer care physicians, including perceived strengths and challenges of providing cancer care in rural areas.  METHODS: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 13 cancer providers associated with all 12 non-metropolitan/rural Iowa hospitals that diagnose or treat >100 cancer patients annually. Iterative thematic analysis was conducted to develop domains. FINDINGS: Participants identified geographic proximity and sense of community as strengths of local care. They described decision-making processes and challenges related to referring patients to larger centers for complex procedures, including a lack of dedicated navigators to facilitate and track transfers between institutions and occasional lack of respect from academic physicians. Participants reported a desire for strengthening collaborations with larger urban/academic cancer centers, including access to educational opportunities, shared resources and strategies to collect and monitor data on quality, and clinical trials. CONCLUSIONS: Rural cancer care providers are dedicated to providing high-quality care close to home for their patients and would welcome opportunities to increase collaboration with larger centers to improve coordination and comprehensiveness of care, collect and monitor data on quality of care, and access continuing education opportunities. Further research is needed to develop implementation approaches that will extend resources, services, and expertise to rural providers to facilitate high-quality cancer care for all cancer patients.

Guideline-concordant breast cancer care by patient race and ethnicity accounting for individual-, facility- and area-level characteristics: a SEER-Medicare study.

PURPOSE: To examine racial-ethnic variation in adherence to established quality metrics (NCCN guidelines and ASCO quality metrics) for breast cancer, accounting for individual-, facility-, and area-level factors. METHODS: Data from women diagnosed with invasive breast cancer at 66+ years of age from 2000 to 2017 were examined using SEER-Medicare. Associations between race and ethnicity and guideline-concordant diagnostics, locoregional treatment, systemic therapy, documented stage, and oncologist encounters were estimated using multilevel logistic regression models to account for clustering within facilities or counties. RESULTS: Black and American Indian/Alaska Native (AIAN) women had consistently lower odds of guideline-recommended care than non-Hispanic White (NHW) women (Diagnostic workup: ORBlack 0.83 (0.79-0.88), ORAIAN 0.66 (0.54-0.81); known stage: ORBlack 0.87 (0.80-0.94), ORAIAN 0.63 (0.47-0.85); seeing an oncologist: ORBlack 0.75 (0.71-0.79), ORAIAN 0.60 (0.47-0.72); locoregional treatment: ORBlack 0.80 (0.76-0.84), ORAIAN 0.84 (0.68-1.02); systemic therapies: ORBlack 0.90 (0.83-0.98), ORAIAN 0.66 (0.48-0.91)). Commission on Cancer accreditation and facility volume were significantly associated with higher odds of guideline-concordant diagnostics, stage, oncologist visits, and systemic therapy. Black residential segregation was associated with significantly lower odds of guideline-concordant locoregional treatment and systemic therapy. Rurality and area SES were associated with significantly lower odds of guideline-concordant diagnostics and oncologist visits. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first study to examine guideline-concordance across the continuum of breast cancer care from diagnosis to treatment initiation. Disparities were present from the diagnostic phase and persisted throughout the clinical course. Facility and area characteristics may facilitate or pose barriers to guideline-adherent treatment and warrant future investigation as mediators of racial-ethnic disparities in breast cancer care.

Differential response to neoadjuvant endocrine therapy for Black/African American and White women in NCDB.

PURPOSE: Compared to White women, there are higher mortality rates in Black/African American (BAA) women with hormone receptor-positive breast cancer (HR + BC) which may be partially due to differences in treatment resistance. We assessed factors associated with response to neoadjuvant endocrine therapy (NET). METHODS: The National Cancer Database (NCDB) was queried for women with clinical stage I-III HR + BC diagnosed 2006-2017 and treated with NET. Univariate and multivariate analyses described associations between the sample, duration of NET, and subsequent treatment response, defined by changes between clinical and pathological staging. RESULTS: The analytic sample included 9864 White and 1090 BAA women. Compared to White women, BAA women were younger, had more co-morbidities, were higher stage at presentation, and more likely to have > 24 weeks of NET. After excluding those with unknown pT/N/M, 3521 White and 365 BAA women were evaluated for NET response. On multivariate analyses, controlling for age, stage, histology, HR positivity, and duration of NET, BAA women were more likely to downstage to pT0/Tis (OR 3.0, CI 1.2-7.1) and upstage to Stage IV (OR 2.4, CI 1.002-5.6). None of the women downstaged to pT0/Tis presented with clinical stage III disease; only 2 of the women upstaged to Stage IV disease presented with clinical Stage I disease. CONCLUSION: Independent of NET duration and clinical stage at presentation, BAA women were more likely to experience both complete tumor response and progression to metastatic disease. These results suggest significant heterogeneity in tumor biology and warrant a more nuanced therapeutic approach to HR + BC.

A Randomized Single-Blinded Study Comparing Preoperative with Post-Mastectomy PECS Block for Post-operative Pain Management in Bilateral Mastectomy with Immediate Reconstruction.

BACKGROUND: Ultrasound-guided pectoralis muscle blocks (PECS I/II) are well established for postoperative pain control after mastectomy with reconstruction. However, optimal timing is unclear. We conducted a randomized controlled single-blinded single-institution trial comparing outcomes of block performed pre-incision versus post-mastectomy. METHOD: Patients with breast cancer undergoing bilateral mastectomy with immediate expander/implant reconstruction were randomized to receive ultrasound-guided PECS I/II either pre-incision (PreM, n = 17) or post-mastectomy and before reconstruction (PostM, n = 17). The primary outcome was the average pain score using the Numerical Rating Score during post-anesthesia care unit (PACU) and inpatient stay, with the study powered to detect a difference in mean pain score of 2. Secondary outcomes included mean pain scores on postoperative day (POD) 2, 3, 7, 14, 90, and 180; pain catastrophizing scores; narcotic requirements; PACU/inpatient length of stay; block procedure time; and complications. RESULT: No significant differences between the two groups were noted in average pain score during PACU (p = 0.57) and 24-h inpatient stay (p = 0.33), in the 2 weeks after surgery at rest (p = 0.90) or during movement (p = 0.30), or at POD 90 and 180 at rest (p = 0.42) or during movement (p = 0.31). Median duration of block procedure (PreM 7 min versus PostM 6 min, p = 0.21) did not differ. Median PACU and inpatient length of stay were the same in each group. Inpatient narcotic requirements were similar, as were length of stay and post-surgical complication rates. CONCLUSION: Intraoperative ultrasound-guided PECS I/II block administered by surgeons following mastectomy had similar outcomes to preoperative blocks. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This trial is registered with Clinical Research Information Service (NCT03653988).

Patterns of Evidence-Based Care for the Diagnosis, Staging, and First-line Treatment of Breast Cancer by Race-Ethnicity: A SEER-Medicare Study.

BACKGROUND: Racial and ethnic disparities in guideline-recommended breast cancer treatment are well documented, however studies including diagnostic and staging procedures necessary to determine treatment indications are lacking. The purpose of this study was to characterize patterns in delivery of evidence-based services for the diagnosis, clinical workup, and first-line treatment of breast cancer by race-ethnicity. METHODS: SEER-Medicare data were used to identify women diagnosed with invasive breast cancer between 2000 and 2017 at age 66 or older (n = 2,15,605). Evidence-based services included diagnostic procedures (diagnostic mammography and breast biopsy), clinical workup (stage and grade determination, lymph node biopsy, and HR and HER2 status determination), and treatment initiation (surgery, radiation, chemotherapy, hormone therapy, and HER2-targeted therapy). Poisson regression was used to estimate rate ratios (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) for each service. RESULTS: Black and American Indian/Alaska Native (AIAN) women had significantly lower rates of evidence-based care across the continuum from diagnostics through first-line treatment compared to non-Hispanic White (NHW) women. AIAN women had the lowest rates of HER2-targeted therapy and hormone therapy initiation. While Black women also had lower initiation of HER2-targeted therapy than NHW, differences in hormone therapy were not observed. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest patterns along the continuum of care from diagnostic procedures to treatment initiation may differ across race-ethnicity groups. IMPACT: Efforts to improve delivery of guideline-concordant treatment and mitigate racial-ethnic disparities in healthcare and survival should include procedures performed as part of the diagnosis, clinical workup, and staging processes.

Effect of rurality and travel distance on contralateral prophylactic mastectomy for unilateral breast cancer.

PURPOSE: Despite lack of survival benefit, demand for contralateral prophylactic mastectomy (CPM) to treat unilateral breast cancer remains high. High uptake of CPM has been demonstrated in Midwestern rural women. Greater travel distance for surgical treatment is associated with CPM. Our objective was to examine the relationship between rurality and travel distance to surgery with CPM. METHODS: Women diagnosed with stages I-III unilateral breast cancer between 2007 and 2017 were identified using the National Cancer Database. Logistic regression was used to model likelihood of CPM based on rurality, proximity to metropolitan centers, and travel distance. A multinomial logistic regression model compared factors associated with CPM with reconstruction versus other surgical options. RESULTS: Both rurality (OR 1.10, 95% CI 1.06-1.15 for non-metro/rural vs. metro) and travel distance (OR 1.37, 95% CI 1.33-1.41 for those who traveled 50 + miles vs. < 30 miles) were independently associated with CPM. For women who traveled 30 + miles, odds of receiving CPM were highest for non-metro/rural women (OR 1.33 for 30-49 miles, OR 1.57 for 50 + miles; reference: metro women traveling < 30 miles). Non-metro/rural women who received reconstruction were more likely to undergo CPM regardless of travel distance (ORs 1.11-1.21). Both metro and metro-adjacent women who received reconstruction were more likely to undergo CPM only if they traveled 30 + miles (ORs 1.24-1.30). CONCLUSION: The impact of travel distance on likelihood of CPM varies by patient rurality and receipt of reconstruction. Further research is needed to understand how patient residence, travel burden, and geographic access to comprehensive cancer care services, including reconstruction, influence patient decisions regarding surgery.

Identifying Core Functions of an Evidence-Based Intervention to Improve Cancer Care Quality in Rural Hospitals.

Background: Rural patients experience worse cancer survival outcomes than urban patients despite similar incidence rates, due in part to significant barriers to accessing quality cancer care. Community hospitals in non-metropolitan/rural areas play a crucial role in providing care to patients who desire and are able to receive care locally. However, rural community hospitals typically face challenges to providing comprehensive care due to lack of resources. The University of Kentucky's Markey Cancer Center Affiliate Network (MCCAN) is an effective complex, multi-level intervention, improving cancer care in rural/under-resourced hospitals by supporting them in achieving American College of Surgeons Commission on Cancer (CoC) standards. With the long-term goal of adapting MCCAN for other rural contexts, we aimed to identify MCCAN's core functions (i.e., the components key to the intervention's effectiveness/implementation) using theory-driven qualitative data research methods. Methods: We conducted eight semi-structured virtual interviews with administrators, coordinators, clinicians, and certified tumor registrars from five MCCAN affiliate hospitals that were not CoC-accredited prior to joining MCCAN. Study team members coded interview transcripts and identified themes related to how MCCAN engaged affiliate sites in improving care quality (intervention functions) and implementing CoC standards (implementation functions) and analyzed themes to identify core functions. We then mapped core functions onto existing theories of change and presented the functions to MCCAN leadership to confirm validity and completeness of the functions. Results: Intervention core functions included: providing expertise and templates for achieving accreditation, establishing a culture of quality-improvement among affiliates, and fostering a shared goal of quality care. Implementation core functions included: fostering a sense of community and partnership, building trust between affiliates and Markey, providing information and resources to increase feasibility and acceptability of meeting CoC standards, and mentoring and empowering administrators and clinicians to champion implementation. Conclusion: The MCCAN intervention presents a more equitable strategy of extending the resources and expertise of large cancer centers to assist smaller community hospitals in achieving evidence-based standards for cancer care. Using rigorous qualitative methods, we distilled this intervention into its core functions, positioning us (and others) to adapt the MCCAN intervention to address cancer disparities in other rural contexts.

Hospital Rurality and Gene Expression Profiling for Early-Stage Breast Cancer among Iowa Residents (2010-2018).

Objective: Given the challenges rural cancer patients face in accessing cancer care as well as the slower diffusion and adoption of new medical technologies among rural providers, the aim of our study was to examine trends in gene expression profiling (GEP) testing and evaluate the association between hospital rurality and receipt of GEP testing. Methods: Data from the Iowa Cancer Registry (ICR) were used to identify women with newly diagnosed, histologically confirmed breast cancer from 2010 through 2018 who met eligibility criteria for GEP testing. Patients were allocated to the hospitals where their most definitive surgical treatment was received, and Rural-Urban Commuting Area codes were used to categorize hospitals into urban (N = 43), large rural (N = 16), and small rural (N = 48). Adjusted odds ratios (aORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were estimated using multivariable logistic regression to evaluate the association between hospital rurality and GEP test use, adjusting for demographic and clinical characteristics. The association between test result and treatment received was assessed among patients who received Oncotype DX (ODX) testing. Results: Of 6,726 patients eligible for GEP test use, 46% (N = 3,069) underwent testing with 95% receiving ODX. While overall GEP testing rates increased over time from 42% between 2010 and 2012 to 51% between 2016 and 2018 (P trend < 0.0001), use continued to be the lowest among patients treated at hospitals in small rural areas. The odds of GEP testing remained significantly lower among patients treated at hospitals located in small rural areas (aOR 0.55; 95% CI 0.43-0.71), after adjusting for demographic and clinical characteristics. ODX recurrence scores were highly correlated with chemotherapy use across all strata of hospital rurality. Conclusions: GEP testing continues to be underutilized, especially among those treated at small rural hospitals. Targeted interventions aimed at increasing rates of GEP testing to ensure the appropriate use of adjuvant chemotherapy may improve health outcomes and lower treatment-related costs.

Analysis of the Understanding and Worry about Lymphedema of Patients with Breast Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Lymphedema is a potential lifelong sequela of breast cancer treatment. We sought to: (1) evaluate the worry and knowledge of patients about lymphedema, (2) quantify patients reporting lymphedema education and screening, and (3) determine willingness to participate in lymphedema screening and prevention programs. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A survey evaluating lymphedema-related knowledge and worry was sent to patients treated for stage 0-III breast cancer. Exclusion criteria included > 10 years since diagnosis, missing clinical staging, and those without axillary surgery. Responses were linked with clinicopathologic information. RESULTS: Of 141 patients meeting inclusion criteria, 89% of those without lymphedema were not at all or slightly worried about lymphedema. Higher levels of worry were associated with clinical stage II-III disease [odds ratio (OR) 2.63, p = 0.03], a history of axillary lymph node dissection (ALND) (OR 4.58, p < 0.01), and employment (OR 2.21, p = 0.05). A total of 102 (72%) patients recalled receiving lymphedema education. Lymphedema knowledge was limited, with < 25% of respondents answering > 50% of the risk factor questions correctly. Worry and knowledge were not significantly associated. Of patients without lymphedema, 36% were interested in learning more about lymphedema and 64% were willing to participate in or learn more about a screening program. Most (66%) felt that lymphedema information should be provided before and after cancer treatment. DISCUSSION: A majority of our breast cancer survivors had limited knowledge about lymphedema risk factors. While most patients were not worried about developing lymphedema, higher worry was seen in patients with a higher clinical stage at diagnosis, ALND, and employment. Our findings suggest potential targets and timing for patient-centered educational interventions.

National Cancer Database trends in surgical resection of the breast primary for stage IV breast cancer.

BACKGROUND: Survival benefit after resection of the breast primary for women with metastatic breast cancer reported in retrospective studies has not been uniformly confirmed by randomized controlled trials. To assess the need for dissemination of trial results by the ACS Cancer Research Program Dissemination and Implementation (ACS CRP D&I) committee, we analyzed trends and predictors of surgery and other therapies for stage IV breast cancer. METHODS: The National Cancer Database (NCDB) was queried to identify women diagnosed with clinical stage IV breast cancer of ductal, lobular, or metaplastic histology between 2004 and 2017. Trends in utilization of breast surgery and other treatments and possible predictors of breast surgery were examined in univariable and multivariable analyses. RESULTS: We identified 87,331 cases meeting inclusion criteria. Rates of surgical resection rose until 2009, peaking at 37%, then declined to a rate of 18% in 2017. The largest decline was seen in the hormone receptor positive (HR+), HER2 negative (HER2-) subgroup with up to 70% of patients undergoing surgery in 2007, down to 15% in 2017. In 2004, the rate of systemic therapy alone was slightly more common than locoregional therapy (surgery and/or radiation) with or without systemic therapy (48% vs 37%). However, by 2017, systemic therapy alone was by far more common (69% vs 20%). CONCLUSION: Rates of surgical resection of the breast primary for stage IV breast cancer have been on the decline in recent years, suggesting that providers at Commission on Cancer accredited hospitals are becoming more selective about who will be offered surgical resection.

The Use of Pectoralis Blocks in Breast Surgery: A Practice Advisory and Narrative Review from the Society for Ambulatory Anesthesia (SAMBA).

Although pectoralis (PECS) blocks are commonly used for breast surgery, recommendations regarding the efficacy of these blocks have thus far not been developed by any professional anesthesia society. Given the potential impact of PECS blocks on analgesia after outpatient breast surgery, The Society for Ambulatory Anesthesia (SAMBA) convened a task force to develop a practice advisory on the use of this analgesic technique. In this practice advisory, we compare the efficacy of PECS blocks with systemic analgesia, local infiltration anesthesia, and paravertebral blockade. Our objectives were to advise on two clinical questions. (1) Does PECS-1 and/or -2 blockade provide more effective analgesia for breast-conserving surgery than either systemic analgesics or surgeon-provided local infiltration anesthesia? (2) Does PECS-1 and/or -2 blockade provide equivalent analgesia for mastectomy compared with a paravertebral block (PVB)? Among patients undergoing breast-conserving surgery, PECS blocks moderately reduce postoperative opioid use, prolong time to analgesic rescue, and decrease postoperative pain scores when compared with systemic analgesics. SAMBA recommends the use of a PECS-1 or -2 blockade in the absence of systemic analgesia (Strength of Recommendation A). No evidence currently exists that strongly favors the use of PECS blocks over surgeon-performed local infiltration in this surgical population. SAMBA cannot recommend PECS blocks over surgical infiltration (Strength of Recommendation C). For patients undergoing a mastectomy, a PECS block may provide an opioid-sparing effect similar to that achieved with PVB; SAMBA recommends the use of a PECS block if a patient is unable to receive a PVB (Strength of Recommendation A).

Rural-urban differences in secular trends of locoregional treatment for ductal carcinoma in situ: A patterns of care analysis.

PRECIS: Omission of PORT following BCS remains high among rural patients despite evidence that PORT leads to a significant reduction in the risk of local recurrence. Further research is needed to examine the impact of rural residence on treatment choices and develop methods to ensure equitable care among all breast cancer patients. BACKGROUND: Despite national guidelines, debate exists among clinicians regarding the optimal approach to treatment for patients diagnosed with ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS). While regional variation in practice patterns has been well documented, population-based information on rural-urban treatment differences is lacking. METHODS: Data from the SEER Patterns of Care studies were used to identify women diagnosed with histologically confirmed DCIS who underwent cancer-directed surgery in the years 1991, 1995, 2000, 2005, 2010, and 2015. Adjusted odds ratios (aORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were estimated using weighted multivariable logistic regression to evaluate cancer-directed surgery and use of post-operative radiation therapy (PORT). RESULTS: Of the 3337 patients who met inclusion criteria, 27% underwent mastectomy, 26% underwent breast-conserving surgery (BCS) without PORT, and 47% underwent BCS with PORT. After adjustment for other covariates, there was no difference in the likelihood of receiving mastectomy between rural and urban patients (aOR = 0.65; 95% CI 0.37-1.14). However, rural residents were more likely than urban residents to have mastectomy during 1991/1995 (aOR = 1.78; 95% CI 1.09-2.91; pinteraction  = 0.022). Across all diagnosis years, patients residing in rural areas were less likely to receive PORT following BCS compared to urban patients (aOR = 0.35; 95% CI 0.18-0.67). CONCLUSIONS: Omission of PORT following BCS remains high among rural patients despite evidence that PORT leads to a significant reduction in the risk of local recurrence. Further research is needed to examine the impact of rural residence on treatment choices and develop methods to ensure equitable care among all breast cancer patients.

Influence of rurality on lymph node assessment among women diagnosed with ductal carcinoma in situ and treated with mastectomy, SEER 2000-2015.

PURPOSE: Despite recommendations from national organizations supporting the use of lymph node assessment (LNA) among patients with ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) at time of mastectomy, variation in practice patterns across the United States has been observed. However, few studies have evaluated LNA differences and rurality. METHODS: Data from the SEER Patterns of Care studies were used to identify women who underwent mastectomy for newly diagnosed DCIS during 2000, 2005, 2010, and 2015. Weighted multivariate logistic regression was used to evaluate the association between rural-urban residence and the use of LNA. A subgroup analysis was performed comparing the use of axillary lymph node dissection (ALND) versus sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB). RESULTS: Of the 504 patients included in the analysis, approximately 81% underwent LNA at time of mastectomy with lower rates of use observed among rural patients (66%) versus urban patients (82%). In multivariate analysis, LNA increased over time (p < 0.0001), and rural patients were less likely to receive LNA compared to urban patients [adjusted odds ratio (aOR) = 0.19; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.06-0.66]. However, the likelihood of undergoing ALND relative to SLNB was lower among rural compared to urban patients (aOR = 0.16; 95% CI 0.03-0.73). CONCLUSIONS: Over time, the use of LNA with mastectomy has increased among DCIS patients. However, significant rural-urban differences in the use and type of LNA persist. The findings of this study highlight the importance of continued research aimed at examining the impact of rurality on the receipt of high-quality cancer care.

The Impact of Commission on Cancer Accreditation Status, Hospital Rurality and Hospital Size on Quality Measure Performance Rates.

BACKGROUND: Rural cancer patients receive lower-quality care and experience worse outcomes than urban patients. Commission on Cancer (CoC) accreditation requires hospitals to monitor performance on evidence-based quality measuresPlease confirm the list of authors is correc, but the impact of accreditation is not clear due to lack of data from non-accredited facilities and confounding between patient rurality and hospital accreditation, rurality, and size. METHODS: This retrospective, observational study assessed associations between rurality, accreditation, size, and performance rates for four CoC quality measures (breast radiation, breast chemotherapy, colon chemotherapy, colon nodal yield). Iowa Cancer Registry data were queried to identify all eligible patients diagnosed between 2011 and 2017. Cases were assigned to the surgery hospital to calculate performance rates. Univariate and multivariate regression models were fitted to identify patient- and hospital-level predictors and assess trends. RESULTS: The study cohort included 10,381 patients; 46% were rural. Compared with urban patients, rural patients more often received treatment at small, rural, and non-accredited facilities (p < 0.001 for all). Rural hospitals had fewer beds and were far less likely to be CoC-accredited than urban hospitals (p < 0.001 for all). On multivariate analysis, CoC accreditation was the strongest, independent predictor of higher hospital performance for all quality measures evaluated (p < 0.05 in each model). Performance rates significantly improved over time only for the colon nodal yield quality measure, and only in urban hospitals. CONCLUSIONS: CoC accreditation requires monitoring and evaluating performance on quality measures, which likely contributes to better performance on these measures. Efforts to support rural hospital accreditation may improve existing disparities in rural cancer treatment and outcomes.

Risk management recommendations and patient acceptance vary with high-risk breast lesions.

INTRODUCTION: Lobular carcinoma in situ (LCIS), atypical ductal and lobular hyperplasia (AH) increase breast cancer risk. We examined risk management recommendations (RMR) and acceptance in AH/LCIS. METHODS: All patients with AH/LCIS on core needle biopsy from 2013 to 2016 at our institution were identified; cancer patients were excluded. Univariate and multivariate analysis examined factors associated with management. RESULTS: 98 % of patients were evaluated by breast surgeons and 53 % underwent risk model calculation (RC). 77 % had new RMR. RMR of MRI screening (MRI), genetic counselling (GC) and medical oncology (MO) referral were 41 %, 18 %, 77 %, respectively. MRI screening was more likely recommended in those with strong family history (p = 0.01), and high RC (p < 0.001). Uptake of at least one RMR did not occur in 84 % of patients. Use of RC correlated with MO acceptance (p = 0.049). CONCLUSIONS: Diagnosis of atypia has the potential to change risk management for most, however only 16 % of patients accepted all RMR.

Improving cancer care locally: Study of a hospital affiliate network model.

PURPOSE: The University of Kentucky Markey Cancer Center Affiliate Network (MCCAN) increased access to high-quality cancer care for patients treated in community hospitals across the state by leveraging the American College of Surgeons Commission on Cancer (CoC) standards to improve quality among its member sites. This study describes the network activities and services identified as most helpful or effective to its members, as well as the perceived value of joining MCCAN or pursing accreditation. METHODS: An independent research team conducted in-depth, semistructured interviews with 18 administrators and clinicians from 10 MCCAN hospitals in 2019. Interviews were transcribed and a thematic analysis was conducted. FINDINGS: Network affiliation and CoC accreditation were perceived as helpful to improving quality of care. Having both clinician and administrative champions were key facilitators to achieving CoC standards and made mentoring of member sites a critical activity of the Network. Other components identified as valuable and/or key to the Network's success included providing access to specific CoC-required clinical services (eg, genetic counseling); offering regular performance monitoring and individualized feedback; establishing a culture of quality improvement; and fostering trust within the Network with patient referrals (ie, sending patients back to their local hospital for ongoing care). CONCLUSIONS: Quality improvement in community cancer programs is challenging but several strategies were identified by members as valuable and effective. Efforts to disseminate the MCCAN model should focus on identifying the needs of community hospitals, implementing a quality monitoring system, and fostering site-level champions who can be influential drivers of change.

Surgical Decision-Making Surrounding Contralateral Prophylactic Mastectomy: Comparison of Treatment Goals, Preferences, and Psychosocial Outcomes from a Multicenter Survey of Breast Cancer Patients.

BACKGROUND: Differences in patient characteristics and decision-making preferences have been described between those who elect breast-conserving surgery (BCS), unilateral mastectomy (UM), or contralateral prophylactic mastectomy (CPM) for breast cancer. However, it is not known whether preferred and actual decision-making roles differ across these surgery types, or whether surgery choice reflects a woman's goals or achieves desired outcomes. METHODS: Women diagnosed with stage 0-III unilateral breast cancer across eight large medical centers responded to a mailed questionnaire regarding treatment decision-making goals, roles, and outcomes. These data were linked to electronic medical records. Differences were assessed using descriptive analyses and logistic regression. RESULTS: There were 750 study participants: 60.1% BCS, 17.9% UM, and 22.0% CPM. On multivariate analysis, reducing worry about recurrence was a more important goal for surgery in the CPM group than the others. Although women's preferred role in the treatment decision did not differ by surgery, the CPM group was more likely to report taking a more-active-than-preferred role than the BCS group. On multivariate analysis that included receipt of additional surgery, posttreatment worry about both ipsilateral and contralateral recurrence was higher in the BCS group than the CPM group (both p < 0.001). The UM group was more worried than the CPM group about contralateral recurrence only (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Women with CPM were more likely to report being able to reduce worry about recurrence as a very important goal for surgery. They were also the least worried about ipsilateral breast recurrence and contralateral breast cancer almost two years postdiagnosis.