No Geographical Inequalities in Survival for Sarcoma Patients in France: A Reference Networks' Outcome?

The national reference network NETSARC+ provides remote access to specialized diagnosis and the Multidisciplinary Tumour Board (MTB) to improve the management and survival of sarcoma patients in France. The IGéAS research program aims to assess the potential of this innovative organization to address geographical inequalities in cancer management. Using the IGéAS cohort built from the nationwide NETSARC+ database, the individual, clinical, and geographical determinants of the 3-year overall survival of sarcoma patients in France were analyzed. The survival analysis was focused on patients diagnosed in 2013 (n = 2281) to ensure sufficient hindsight to collect patient follow-up. Our study included patients with bone (16.8%), soft-tissue (69%), and visceral (14.2%) sarcomas, with a median age of 61.8 years. The overall survival was not associated with geographical variables after adjustment for individual and clinical factors. The lower survival in precarious population districts [HR 1.23, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.48] in comparison to wealthy metropolitan areas (HR = 1) found in univariable analysis was due to the worst clinical presentation at diagnosis of patients. The place of residence had no impact on sarcoma patients' survival, in the context of the national organization driven by the reference network. Following previous findings, this suggests the ability of this organization to go through geographical barriers usually impeding the optimal management of cancer patients.

Determinants of the access to remote specialised services provided by national sarcoma reference centres.

BACKGROUND: Spatial inequalities in cancer management have been evidenced by studies reporting lower quality of care or/and lower survival for patients living in remote or socially deprived areas. NETSARC+ is a national reference network implemented to improve the outcome of sarcoma patients in France since 2010, providing remote access to specialized diagnosis and Multidisciplinary Tumour Board (MTB). The IGéAS research program aims to assess the potential of this innovative organization, with remote management of cancers including rare tumours, to go through geographical barriers usually impeding the optimal management of cancer patients. METHODS: Using the nationwide NETSARC+ databases, the individual, clinical and geographical determinants of the access to sarcoma-specialized diagnosis and MTB were analysed. The IGéAS cohort (n = 20,590) includes all patients living in France with first sarcoma diagnosis between 2011 and 2014. Early access was defined as specialised review performed before 30 days of sampling and as first sarcoma MTB discussion performed before the first surgery. RESULTS: Some clinical populations are at highest risk of initial management without access to sarcoma specialized services, such as patients with non-GIST visceral sarcoma for diagnosis [OR 1.96, 95% CI 1.78 to 2.15] and MTB discussion [OR 3.56, 95% CI 3.16 to 4.01]. Social deprivation of the municipality is not associated with early access on NETSARC+ remote services. The quintile of patients furthest away from reference centres have lower chances of early access to specialized diagnosis [OR 1.18, 95% CI 1.06 to 1.31] and MTB discussion [OR 1.24, 95% CI 1.10 to 1.40] but this influence of the distance is slight in comparison with clinical factors and previous studies on the access to cancer-specialized facilities. CONCLUSIONS: In the context of national organization driven by reference network, distance to reference centres slightly alters the early access to sarcoma specialized services and social deprivation has no impact on it. The reference networks' organization, designed to improve the access to specialized services and the quality of cancer management, can be considered as an interesting device to reduce social and spatial inequalities in cancer management. The potential of this organization must be confirmed by further studies, including survival analysis.

Beyond the map: evidencing the spatial dimension of health inequalities.

BACKGROUND: Spatial inequalities in health result from different exposures to health risk factors according to the features of geographical contexts, in terms of physical environment, social deprivation, and health care accessibility. Using a common geographical referential, which combines indices measuring these contextual features, could improve the comparability of studies and the understanding of the spatial dimension of health inequalities. METHODS: We developed the Geographical Classification for Health studies (GeoClasH) to distinguish French municipalities according to their ability to influence health outcomes. Ten contextual scores measuring physical and social environment as well as spatial accessibility of health care have been computed and combined to classify French municipalities through a K-means clustering. Age-standardized mortality rates according to the clusters of this classification have been calculated to assess its effectiveness. RESULTS: Significant lower mortality rates compared to the mainland France population were found in the Wealthy Metropolitan Areas (SMR = 0.868, 95% CI 0.863-0.873) and in the Residential Outskirts (SMR = 0.971, 95% CI 0.964-0.978), while significant excess mortality were found for Precarious Population Districts (SMR = 1.037, 95% CI 1.035-1.039), Agricultural and Industrial Plains (SMR = 1.066, 95% CI 1.063-1.070) and Rural Margins (SMR = 1.042, 95% CI 1.037-1.047). CONCLUSIONS: Our results evidence the comprehensive contribution of the geographical context in the constitution of health inequalities. To our knowledge, GeoClasH is the first nationwide classification that combines social, environmental and health care access scores at the municipality scale. It can therefore be used as a proxy to assess the geographical context of the individuals in public health studies.

Geographical Accessibility of the Referral Networks in France. Intermediate Results from the IGéAS Research Program.

Rare cancer patients face lower survival and experience delays in diagnosis and therapeutic mismanagement. Considering the specificities of rare cancers, referral networks have been implemented in France to improve the management and survival of patients. The IGéAS research program aims to assess the networks' ability to reduce inequalities. Data analysis of the IGéAS cohort (n = 20,590, sarcoma diagnosed between 2011 and 2014) by gathering medical data and geographical index will identify risk factors associated with the belated access to expertise or with no access to expertise. Intermediate results show that referral networks give sarcoma patients access to sarcoma expertise despite the remoteness of some of them. Regional expert centers mostly receive requests from within their area while national referral centers receive requests from the whole country. Delays in the access to expertise may be reduced by making outside practitioners more sensitive to the issues of rare cancers. The perception and involvement of outside practitioners in this device will be assessed using a qualitative survey. All the results are discussed and will contribute to design guidelines to improve early access to expertise and reduce inequalities. Results of the IGéAS research program may contribute to the assessment of referral sarcoma networks and provide some useful lessons to improve cancer care management.

Territorial inequalities in management and conformity to clinical guidelines for sarcoma patients: an exhaustive population-based cohort analysis in the Rhône-Alpes region.

BACKGROUND: Sarcomas are rare cancers with great variability in clinical and histopathological presentation. The main objective of clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) is to standardize diagnosis and treatment. METHODS: From March 2005 to February 2007, all patients diagnosed with localized sarcoma in the Rhône-Alpes region were included in a cohort-based study, to evaluate the compliance of sarcoma management with French guidelines in routine practice and to identify predictive factors for compliance with CGPs. RESULTS: 634 (71 %) patients with localized sarcoma satisfying the inclusion criteria were included out of 891 newly diagnosed sarcomas. Taking into account initial diagnosis until follow-up, overall conformity to CPGs was only 40 % [95 % confidence interval (CI) = 36-44], ranging from 54 % for gastrointestinal stromal tumor to 36 % for soft tissue sarcoma and 42 % for bone sarcoma. In multivariate analysis, primary tumor type [relative risk (RR) = 4.42, 95 % CI = 2.79-6.99, p < 0.001], dedicated multidisciplinary staff before surgery (RR = 4.19, 95 % CI = 2.39-7.35, p < 0.001) and management in specialized hospitals (RR = 3.71, 95 % CI = 2.43-5.66, p < 0.001) were identified as unique independent risk factors for conformity to CPGs for overall treatment sequence. CONCLUSIONS: With only 40 % of total conformity to CPGs, the conclusions support the improvement of initial sarcoma management and its performance in specialized centres or within specialized dedicated networks.