Exploring the complexity and spectrum of racial/ethnic disparities in colon cancer management.

BACKGROUND: Colorectal cancer is a leading cause of morbidity and mortality across U.S. racial/ethnic groups. Existing studies often focus on a particular race/ethnicity or single domain within the care continuum. Granular exploration of disparities among different racial/ethnic groups across the entire colon cancer care continuum is needed. We aimed to characterize differences in colon cancer outcomes by race/ethnicity across each stage of the care continuum. METHODS: We used the 2010-2017 National Cancer Database to examine differences in outcomes by race/ethnicity across six domains: clinical stage at presentation; timing of surgery; access to minimally invasive surgery; post-operative outcomes; utilization of chemotherapy; and cumulative incidence of death. Analysis was via multivariable logistic or median regression, with select demographics, hospital factors, and treatment details as covariates. RESULTS: 326,003 patients (49.6% female, 24.0% non-White, including 12.7% Black, 6.1% Hispanic/Spanish, 1.3% East Asian, 0.9% Southeast Asian, 0.4% South Asian, 0.3% AIAE, and 0.2% NHOPI) met inclusion criteria. Relative to non-Hispanic White patients: Southeast Asian (OR 1.39, p < 0.01), Hispanic/Spanish (OR 1.11 p < 0.01), and Black (OR 1.09, p < 0.01) patients had increased odds of presenting with advanced clinical stage. Southeast Asian (OR 1.37, p < 0.01), East Asian (OR 1.27, p = 0.05), Hispanic/Spanish (OR 1.05 p = 0.02), and Black (OR 1.05, p < 0.01) patients had increased odds of advanced pathologic stage. Black patients had increased odds of experiencing a surgical delay (OR 1.33, p < 0.01); receiving non-robotic surgery (OR 1.12, p < 0.01); having post-surgical complications (OR 1.29, p < 0.01); initiating chemotherapy more than 90 days post-surgery (OR 1.24, p < 0.01); and omitting chemotherapy altogether (OR 1.12, p = 0.05). Black patients had significantly higher cumulative incidence of death at every pathologic stage relative to non-Hispanic White patients when adjusting for non-modifiable patient factors (p < 0.05, all stages), but these differences were no longer statistically significant when also adjusting for modifiable factors such as insurance status and income. CONCLUSIONS: Non-White patients disproportionately experience advanced stage at presentation. Disparities for Black patients are seen across the entire colon cancer care continuum. Targeted interventions may be appropriate for some groups; however, major system-level transformation is needed to address disparities experienced by Black patients.

Disparities in Care Access to Liver-Directed Therapy Among Medicare Beneficiaries with Colorectal Cancer Liver Metastasis.

BACKGROUND: Liver-directed therapies (LDT) are important components of the multidisciplinary care of patients with colorectal cancer liver metastases (CRCLM) that contribute to improved long-term outcomes. Factors associated with receipt of LDT are poorly understood. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients > 65 years old diagnosed with CRCLM were identified within the Medicare Standard Analytic File (2013-2017). Patients with extrahepatic metastatic disease were excluded. Mixed-effects analyses were used to assess patient factors associated with the primary outcome of LDT, defined as hepatectomy, ablation, and/or hepatic artery infusion chemotherapy (HAIC), as well as the secondary outcome of hepatectomy. RESULTS: Among 23,484 patients with isolated CRCLM, only 2004 (8.5%) received LDT, although resectability status could not be determined for the entire cohort. Among patients who received LDT, 61.7% underwent hepatectomy alone, 28.1% received ablation alone, 8.5% underwent hepatectomy and ablation, and 1.8% received HAIC either alone (0.8%) or in combination with hepatectomy and/or ablation (0.9%). Patient factors independently associated with lower odds of LDT included older age, female sex, Black race, greater comorbidity burden, higher social vulnerability index, primary rectal cancer, synchronous liver metastasis, and further distance from a high-volume liver surgery center (p < 0.05). Results were similar for receipt of hepatectomy. CONCLUSIONS: Despite the well-accepted role of LDT for CRCLM, only a small proportion of Medicare beneficiaries with CRCLM receive LDT. Increasing access to specialized centers with expertise in LDT, particularly for Black patients, female patients, and those with higher levels of social vulnerability or long travel distances, may improve outcomes for patients with CRCLM.

Assessment of Knowledge, Attitude, and Practice Concerning COVID-19 Among Undergraduate Students of Faculty of Applied Medical Sciences at King Khalid University, Abha, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia: A Cross-Sectional Surveyed Study.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia has exerted great efforts to prevent the spread of COVID-19. This research aims to scrutinize the outlook, awareness, and customs of Saudi undergraduate students regarding COVID-19. METHODS: The current cross-sectional study comprises 178 undergraduate students in the Faculty of Applied Medical Sciences. The data were collected from online Google form questionnaires. The differences were picked out of the questionnaires, and the mean scores of the differences were duly assessed. The variables associated with knowledge, attitude, and practice toward COVID-19 were evaluated; moreover, a comparative study was conducted on these variables in different faculty departments. ANOVA, Student's t-test, and binary logistic regression analysis were used to assess the data on knowledge, attitude, and practice. RESULTS: Most of the undergraduate students were well acquainted with COVID-19. We obtained the mean knowledge score for COVID-19 to be 3.08 ± .82 (range: 1-5), indicating good knowledge. The attitude means the score was 3.02 ± .61 (range: 0-4), implying good positive attitudes. On assessing the mean score of practices, it was found 5 ± .47 (range: 0-7), pointing towards perfect practices. There were no significant differences between males and females regarding knowledge, attitudes, and practice toward COVID-19 (p-value < 0.05). CONCLUSION: Students of Applied Medical Sciences are knowledgeable about COVID-19. Health education programs should be focused on protection and safety from COVID-19 for Applied Medical Sciences students, especially Medical Rehabilitation Sciences and Radiology. Hand hygiene awareness programs must be conducted for undergraduate students. Infection control should be part of the undergraduate applied for medical sciences curriculum program.

Each procedure matters: threshold for surgeon volume to minimize complications and decrease cost associated with adrenalectomy.

BACKGROUND: An association has been suggested between increasing surgeon volume and improved patient outcomes, but a threshold has not been defined for what constitutes a "high-volume" adrenal surgeon. METHODS: Adult patients who underwent adrenalectomy by an identifiable surgeon between 1998-2009 were selected from the Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project National Inpatient Sample. Logistic regression modeling with restricted cubic splines was utilized to estimate the association between annual surgeon volume and complication rates in order to identify a volume threshold. RESULTS: A total of 3,496 surgeons performed adrenalectomies on 6,712 patients; median annual surgeon volume was 1 case. After adjustment, the likelihood of experiencing a complication decreased with increasing annual surgeon volume up to 5.6 cases (95% confidence interval, 3.27-5.96). After adjustment, patients undergoing resection by low-volume surgeons (<6 cases/year) were more likely to experience complications (odds ratio 1.71, 95% confidence interval, 1.27-2.31, P = .005), have a greater hospital stay (relative risk 1.46, 95% confidence interval, 1.25-1.70, P = .003), and at increased cost (+26.2%, 95% confidence interval, 12.6-39.9, P = .02). CONCLUSION: This study suggests that an annual threshold of surgeon volume (≥6 cases/year) that is associated with improved patient outcomes and decreased hospital cost. This volume threshold has implications for quality improvement, surgical referral and reimbursement, and surgical training.

Racial Disparities in Differentiated Thyroid Cancer: Have We Bridged the Gap?

BACKGROUND: Racial disparities in the management of differentiated thyroid cancer (DTC) exist in the United States. There is a paucity of data examining their temporal trends. It was hypothesized that racial disparities in care provided to patients with DTC have improved over the past 15 years. METHODS: Adult patients undergoing surgery for DTC were included from the National Cancer Data Base (1998-2012). Temporal trends in appropriate extent of thyroidectomy and radioactive iodine therapy (RAI) were described for different racial groups. Multivariable logistic regression models were employed to estimate the adjusted association of receipt of appropriate extent of surgery and RAI, specifically under- and over-treatment, among different racial groups. RESULTS: Among 282,043 DTC patients, 80.3% were non-Hispanic white (white), 8.1% Hispanic, 7.2% non-Hispanic black (black), and 4.4% Asian. Black versus white race/ethnicity was associated with lower odds of receiving appropriate surgery (odds ratio [OR] = 0.78 [confidence interval (CI) 0.71-0.87]; p < 0.001). Appropriate RAI treatment was higher in blacks (OR = 1.07 [CI 1.02-1.12]; p = 0.01) and lower for Hispanics (OR = 0.90 [CI 0.86-0.95]; p < 0.001) compared with whites. There was a higher likelihood of RAI under-treatment in minority groups (Hispanic OR = 1.27, black OR = 1.26, Asian OR = 1.25; p < 0.001), and a lower likelihood of RAI over-treatment (Hispanic OR = 0.89, black OR = 0.83, Asian OR = 0.79; p < 0.001) compared with whites. Over time, an increasing proportion of black and white patients underwent appropriate extent of thyroidectomy (1998 vs. 2012: 78% vs. 88% and 81% vs. 91%, respectively). Compared with 1998, fewer patients in 2012 were under-treated with RAI: whites (48% vs. 29%, respectively), blacks (51% vs. 33%), Hispanics (51% vs. 37%), and Asians (55% vs. 39%). The extent of RAI over-treatment increased (1998 vs. 2012): whites (1% vs. 4%), blacks (2% vs. 4%), Hispanics (2% vs. 4%), and Asians (2% vs. 3%), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Appropriate utilization of surgery and RAI for DTC has improved over time. However, the proportion of patients receiving appropriate thyroid surgery is consistently lower for blacks compared with whites. RAI over-treatment increased for all races over the study period. Efforts are needed to standardize DTC care among minority patients.

Insurance Status, Not Race, is Associated With Use of Minimally Invasive Surgical Approach for Rectal Cancer.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the impact of race and insurance on use of minimally invasive (MIS) compared with open techniques for rectal cancer in the United States. BACKGROUND: Race and socioeconomic status have been implicated in disparities of rectal cancer treatment. METHODS: Adults undergoing MIS (laparoscopic or robotic) or open rectal resections for stage I to III rectal adenocarcinoma were included from the National Cancer Database (2010-2012). Multivariate analyses were employed to examine the adjusted association of race and insurance with use of MIS versus open surgery. RESULTS: Among 23,274 patients, 39% underwent MIS and 61% open surgery. Overall, 86% were white, 8% black, and 3% Asian. Factors associated with use of open versus MIS were black race, Medicare/Medicaid insurance, and lack of insurance. However, after adjustment for patient demographic, clinical, and treatment characteristics, black race was not associated with use of MIS versus open surgery [odds ratio [OR] 0.90, P = 0.07). Compared with privately insured patients, uninsured patients (OR 0.52, P < 0.01) and those with Medicare/Medicaid (OR 0.79, P < 0.01) were less likely to receive minimally invasive resections. Lack of insurance was significantly associated with less use of MIS in black (OR 0.59, P = 0.02) or white patients (OR 0.51, P < 0.01). However, among uninsured patients, black race was not associated with lower use of MIS (OR 0.96, P = 0.59). CONCLUSIONS: Insurance status, not race, is associated with utilization of minimally invasive techniques for oncologic rectal resections. Due to the short-term benefits and cost-effectiveness of minimally invasive techniques, hospitals may need to improve access to these techniques, especially for uninsured patients.

Alvimopan Provides Additional Improvement in Outcomes and Cost Savings in Enhanced Recovery Colorectal Surgery.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the impact of alvimopan on outcomes and costs in a rigorous enhanced recovery colorectal surgery protocol. BACKGROUND: Postoperative ileus remains a major source of morbidity and costs in colorectal surgery. Alvimopan has been shown to reduce incidence of postoperative ileus in enhanced recovery colorectal surgery; however, data are equivocal regarding its benefit in reducing length of stay and costs. METHODS: Patients undergoing major elective enhanced recovery colorectal surgery were identified from a prospectively-collected database (2010-2013). Multivariable analyses were employed to compare outcomes and hospital costs among patients who had alvimopan versus no alvimopan by adjusting for demographic, clinical, and treatment characteristics. RESULTS: A total of 660 patients were included; 197 patients received alvimopan and 463 patients had no alvimopan. In unadjusted analysis, the alvimopan group had a faster return of bowel function, shorter length of stay, and lower rates of ileus, Foley re-insertion, and urinary tract infection (all P < 0.01). After adjustment, alvimopan was associated with a faster return of bowel function by 0.6 day (P = 0.0006), and lower incidence of postoperative ileus (odds ratio 0.23, P = 0.0002). With adjustment, alvimopan was associated with a shorter length of stay by 1.6 days (P = 0.002), and a hospital cost savings of $1492 per patient (P = 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Alvimopan administration as an element of enhanced recovery colorectal surgery is associated with faster return of bowel function, lower incidence of postoperative ileus, shorter hospitalization, and a significant cost savings. These results suggest that alvimopan is cost-effective in the setting of enhanced recovery colorectal surgery protocols, and should therefore be considered in these programs.