Association of race, demographic and socioeconomic factors with failure to rescue after hepato-pancreato-biliary surgery in the United States.

BACKGROUND: We aimed to describe the association of patient-related factors such as race, socioeconomic status, and insurance on failure to rescue (FTR) after hepato-pancreato-biliary (HPB) surgeries. METHODS: Using the National Inpatient Sample, we analyzed 98,788 elective HPB surgeries between 2004 and 2017. Major and minor complications were identified using ICD9/10 codes. We evaluated mortality rates and FTR (inpatient mortality after major complications). We used multivariate logistic regression analysis to assess racial, socioeconomic, and demographic factors on FTR, adjusting for covariates. RESULTS: Overall, 43 % of patients (n = 42,256) had pancreatic operations, 36% (n = 35,526) had liver surgery, and 21% (n = 21,006) had biliary interventions. The overall major complication rate was 21% (n = 20,640), of which 8% (n = 1655) suffered FTR. Factors independently associated with increased risk for FTR were male sex, older age, higher Charlson Comorbidity Index, Hispanic ethnicity, Asian or other race, lower income quartile, Medicare insurance, and southern region hospitals. CONCLUSIONS: Medicare insurance, male gender, Hispanic ethnicity, and lower income quartile were associated with increased risk for FTR. Efforts should be made to improve the identification and subsequent treatment of complications for those at high risk of FTR.

Cost Analysis and Financial Implications of a Peritoneal Surface Malignancy Program in the USA.

BACKGROUND: We aimed to describe the financial implications of cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (CRS/HIPEC) in the USA. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cost analysis of 100 CRS/HIPEC procedures to examine the impact of patient and procedural factors on hospital costs and reimbursement. A comparison of surgeons' work relative value units (wRVUs) between CRS/HIPEC and a representative sample of complex surgical oncology procedures was made to assess the physicians' compensation rate. Univariable and multivariable backward logistic regression was used to analyze the association between perioperative variables and high direct cost (HDCs). RESULTS: The median direct cost per CRS/HIPEC procedure was US $44,770. The median hospital reimbursement was US $43,066, while professional reimbursement was US $8608, resulting in a positive contribution margin of US $7493/procedure. However, the contribution margin significantly varied with the payer mix. Privately insured patients had a positive median contribution margin of US $23,033, whereas Medicare-insured patients had a negative contribution margin of US $13,034. Length of stay (LOS) had the most significant association with HDC, and major complications had the most significant association with LOS. Finally, CRS/HIPEC procedures generated a median of 13 wRVU/h, which is significantly lower than the wRVU/h generated by open pancreatoduodenectomies, open gastrectomies, and hepatectomies. However, higher operation complexity and multiple visceral resections help compensate for the relatively low wRVU/h. CONCLUSIONS: CRS/HIPEC is an expensive operation, and prolonged LOS has the most significant impact on the total cost of the procedure. High-quality care is essential to improve patient outcomes and maintain the economic sustainability of the procedure.

Defining the Price Tag of Complications Following Pancreatic Surgery: A US National Perspective.

INTRODUCTION: Pancreatic surgery tends to have a high rate of postoperative complications due to its complex nature, significantly increasing hospital costs. Our aim was to describe the true association between complications and hospital costs in a national cohort of US patients. METHODS: The National Inpatient Sample was used to conduct a retrospective analysis of elective pancreatic resections performed between 2004 and 2017, categorizing them based on whether patients experienced major complications (MaC), minor complications (MiC), or no complications (NC). Multivariable quantile regression was used to analyze how costs varied at different percentiles of the cost curve. RESULTS: Of 37,893 patients, 45.3%, 28.6%, and 26.1% experienced NC, MiC, and MaC, respectively. Factors associated with MaC were a Charlson Comorbidity Index of ≥4, prolonged length of stay, proximal pancreatectomy, older age, male sex, and surgery performed at hospitals with a small number of beds or at urban nonteaching hospitals (all P < 0.01). Multivariable quantile regression revealed significant variation in MiC and MaC across the cost curve. At the 50th percentile, MiC increased the cost by $3352 compared to NC while MaC almost doubled the cost of the surgery, increasing it by $20,215 (both P < 0.01). The association between complications and cost was even greater at the 95th percentile, increasing the cost by $10,162 and $108,793 for MiC and MaC, respectively (P < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: MiC and MaC were significantly associated with increased hospital costs. Furthermore, the relationship between MaC and costs was especially apparent at higher percentiles of the cost curve.

Socioeconomic and racial/ethnic disparities in receipt of palliative care among patients with metastatic hepatocellular carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Patients with metastatic hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) suffer symptoms of both end-stage liver disease and cancer. Palliative care (PC) enhances the quality of life via symptom control and even improves survival for some cancers. Our study characterized rates of PC utilization among metastatic HCC patients and determined factors associated with PC receipt. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective review of adult National Cancer Database patients diagnosed with metastatic HCC between 2004 and 2016. Chi-square tests were used to analyze two cohorts: those who received PC and those who did not. Logistic regression was performed to assess the impact of clinicodemographic factors on the likelihood of receiving PC. RESULTS: PC utilization was low at just 17%. Later year of diagnosis, insured status, and higher education level were associated with an increased likelihood of receiving PC. Treatment at academic centers or integrated network cancer programs increased the likelihood of receiving PC compared to treatment at a community center (odds ratio [OR] = 1.17, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.03-1.33 and OR = 1.25, 95% CI = 1.07-1.45; respectively). Hispanics were significantly less likely to received PC than non-Hispanic Whites (OR = 0.73, 95% CI = 0.64-0.82). CONCLUSIONS: PC utilization among patients with metastatic HCC remains low. Targeted efforts should be enacted to increase the delivery of PC in this group.

Treatment and Survival Disparities of Colon Cancer in the Texas-Mexico Border Population: Cancer Disparities in Border Population.

BACKGROUND: Previous studies have reported healthcare disparities in the Texas-Mexico border population. Our aim was to evaluate treatment utilization and oncologic outcomes of colon cancer patients in this vulnerable population. METHODS: Patients with localized and regional colon cancer (CC) were identified in the Texas Cancer Registry (1995-2016). Clinicopathological data, hospital factors, receipt of optimal treatment, and overall survival (OS) were compared between Texas-Mexico Border (TMB) and the Non-Texas-Mexico Border (NTMB) cohorts. Multivariable analysis was performed to identify risk factors associated with decreased survival. RESULTS: We identified 43,557 patients with localized/regional CC (9% TMB and 91% NTMB). TMB patients were more likely to be Hispanic (73% versus 13%), less likely to have private insurance (13% versus 21%), were more often treated at safety net hospitals (82% versus 22%) and less likely at ACS-CoC accredited hospitals (32% versus 57%). TMB patients were more likely to receive suboptimal treatment (21% versus 16%) and had a lower median OS for localized (8.58 versus 9.58 y) and regional colon cancer (5.75 versus 6.18 y, all P < 0.001). In multivariable analysis, TMB status was not associated with worse OS. Factors associated with worse survival included receipt of suboptimal treatment, Medicare/insured status, and treatment in safety net and non-accredited ACS-CoC hospitals (all P < 0.001) CONCLUSIONS: While TMB CC patients had worse OS, TMB status itself was not found to be a risk factor for decreased survival. This survival disparity is likely associated with higher rate of suboptimal treatment, Medicare/Uninsured status, and decreased access to ACS-CoC accredited hospitals.

Dissecting disease, race, ethnicity, and socioeconomic factors for hepatocellular carcinoma: An analysis from the United States Safety Net Collaborative.

BACKGROUND: Racial/ethnic and socioeconomic disparities are assumed to negatively affect treatment and outcomes for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Our aim was to investigate the interaction of racial/ethnic and socioeconomic factors with stage of disease and type of treatment facility in receipt of treatment and overall survival (OS) of patients with HCC. METHODS: All patients with primary HCC in the US Safety-Net Collaborative database (2012-2014) were included. Patients were categorized into "safety-net" or "tertiary referral center" based on where they received treatment. Socioeconomic factors were determined at the zip-code level and included median income and percent of adults who graduated from high-school. Primary outcomes were receipt of treatment and OS. RESULTS: On MV Cox regression, neither race/ethnicity, median income, nor care provided at a SNH were associated with decreased OS (all p > 0.05). Independent predictors of decreased OS included lack of insurance (HR 1.34), less educational attainment (HR 1.59) higher MELD score (HR 1.07), higher stage at diagnosis (II:HR 1.34, III:HR 2.87, IV:HR 3.23), and not receiving treatment (HR 3.94) (all p < 0.05). Factors associated with not receiving treatment included history of alcohol abuse (OR 0.682), increasing MELD (OR 0.874), higher stage at diagnosis (III: OR 0.234, IV: OR 0.210) and care at a safety net facility (OR 0.424) There were no racial/ethnic or socioeconomic disparities in receipt of treatment. CONCLUSIONS: There is no intrinsic or direct association of race/ethnicity, socioeconomic status, or being treated at select safety-net hospitals with worse outcomes. Poor liver function, no insurance, and advanced stage of presentation are the main determinants of not receiving treatment and decreased survival.

Effect of fragmentation of cancer care on treatment use and survival in hepatocellular carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Fragmented cancer care (FC), or care received from multiple institutions, increases systemic health care costs and potentiates cancer care disparities. There is a paucity of data on mechanisms contributing to FC and the resulting effect on patient outcomes. This study characterized patient- and hospital-level factors associated with FC, time to treatment (TTT), and overall survival (OS) in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). METHODS: Patients newly diagnosed with HCC from 2004 to 2015 and receiving treatment were identified in the Texas Cancer Registry. Patient- and hospital-level factors were compared across 2 cohorts: an FC treatment group and a nonfragmented cancer care (NFC) treatment group. Covariate-adjusted treatment use and OS were compared between the 2 treatment groups. RESULTS: Among 4329 patients with HCC, 1185 (27.4%) received FC, and 3144 (72.6%) received NFC. Compared with NFC patients, FC patients had larger tumors (median size ≥4 cm, 52.6% vs 35.2%; P < .001), and a higher proportion had a regional/metastatic stage (35.9% vs 26.7%; P < .001). Among patients with localized disease, FC was associated with decreased odds of curative therapy (odds ratio, 0.83; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.7-0.9). FC was associated with worse OS (hazard ratio [HR], 1.14; 95% CI, 1.05-1.24) and increased TTT (HR, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.7-0.8). In the subset of patients with localized-stage HCC who received curative therapy, FC was associated with worse OS (median survival, 67 vs 43 months; HR, 1.2; 95% CI, 1.0-1.4) and increased TTT (HR, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.7-0.8). CONCLUSIONS: FC patients were less likely to undergo curative therapy when they were diagnosed at an early stage. After covariate adjustment, newly diagnosed patients with HCC receiving FC had worse OS and increased TTT.

Patient-reported barriers are associated with lower hepatocellular carcinoma surveillance rates in patients with cirrhosis.

Over 20% of patients with cirrhosis are nonadherent with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) surveillance recommendations; however, few studies have evaluated the impact of patient-level factors on surveillance receipt. We characterized the association between HCC surveillance receipt and patient knowledge, attitudes, and perceived barriers in a racially diverse and socioeconomically disadvantaged cohort of patients with cirrhosis. Patients with cirrhosis followed at a large urban hospital were invited to complete a survey about HCC surveillance between August 2014 and December 2015. Multivariable logistic regression was performed to identify factors associated with HCC surveillance receipt during the 12-month period preceding and 6-month period after survey administration. We achieved a response rate of 71.8% (n = 541 of 753). Patients demonstrated high levels of HCC-related knowledge (summary score, 77.7%); however, 48.6% believed that eating a healthy diet precluded the need for HCC surveillance, and 34.0% believed that HCC surveillance was not necessary if they had a normal physical exam and/or lacked clinical symptoms. Patients expressed worry about developing and dying from HCC, but nearly half (49.9%) of patients reported barriers to receiving HCC surveillance, including difficulty with the scheduling process (30.5%), costs of surveillance testing (25.3%), and transportation difficulties (17.3%). HCC surveillance receipt was significantly higher in patients who knew cirrhosis is a risk factor for developing HCC (odds ratio [OR], 3.09; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.25-7.62) and significantly lower in those reporting barriers to surveillance (OR, 0.42; 95% CI, 0.25-0.70). CONCLUSION: Patients with cirrhosis are knowledgeable and interested in HCC surveillance; however, patient-reported barriers are associated with lower surveillance rates in clinical practice and represent potential intervention targets to improve HCC surveillance effectiveness. (Hepatology 2017;65:875-884).

An assessment of benefits and harms of hepatocellular carcinoma surveillance in patients with cirrhosis.

Although surveillance ultrasound and alpha fetoprotein (AFP) tests have minimal direct harm, downstream harms from follow-up tests must be weighed against surveillance benefits when determining the value of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) screening programs. Our study's aims were to characterize prevalence and correlates of surveillance benefits and harms in cirrhosis patients undergoing HCC surveillance. We conducted a retrospective cohort study among patients with cirrhosis followed at a safety-net health system between July 2010 and July 2013. We recorded surveillance-related benefits, defined as early tumor detection and curative treatment, and surveillance-related physical harms, defined as computed tomography or magnetic resonance imaging scans, biopsies, or other procedures performed for false-positive or indeterminate surveillance results. Sociodemographic and clinical correlates of surveillance harms were evaluated using multivariable logistic regression. We identified 680 patients with cirrhosis, of whom 78 (11.5%) developed HCC during the 3-year study period. Of the 48 (61.5%) HCCs identified by surveillance, 43.8% were detected by ultrasound, 31.2% by AFP, and 25.0% by both surveillance tests. Surveillance-detected patients had a higher proportion of early HCC (70.2% vs. 40.0%; P = 0.009), with no difference in tumor stage between ultrasound- and AFP-detected tumors (P = 0.53). Surveillance-related physical harms were observed in 187 (27.5%) patients, with a higher proportion of ultrasound-related harm than AFP-related harm (22.8% vs. 11.4%; P < 0.001). Surveillance-related harms were associated with elevated ALT (odds ratio [OR], 1.87; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.26-2.76), thrombocytopenia (OR, 2.06; 95% CI, 1.26-3.38), and hepatology subspecialty care (OR, 1.63; 95% CI, 1.09-2.42). CONCLUSION: Over one fourth of patients with cirrhosis experience physical harm for false-positive or indeterminate surveillance tests-more often related to ultrasound than AFP. Interventions are needed to reduce surveillance-related harm to increase the value of HCC screening programs in clinical practice. (Hepatology 2017;65:1196-1205).

Practice patterns and attitudes of primary care providers and barriers to surveillance of hepatocellular carcinoma in patients with cirrhosis.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Fewer than 20% of patients with cirrhosis undergo surveillance for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), therefore these tumors often are detected at late stages. Although primary care providers (PCPs) care for 60% of patients with cirrhosis in the United States, little is known about their practice patterns for HCC surveillance. We investigated factors associated with adherence to guidelines for HCC surveillance by PCPs. METHODS: We conducted a web-based survey of all 131 PCPs at a large urban hospital. The survey was derived from validated surveys and pretested among providers; it included questions about provider and practice characteristics, self-reported rates of surveillance, surveillance test and frequency preference, and attitudes and barriers to HCC surveillance. RESULTS: We obtained a clinic-level response rate of 100% and a provider-level response rate of 60%. Only 65% of respondents reported annual surveillance and 15% reported biannual surveillance of patients for HCC. Barriers to HCC surveillance included not being up-to-date with HCC guidelines (68% of PCPs), difficulties in communicating effectively with patients about HCC surveillance (56%), and more important issues to manage in the clinic (52%). Approximately half of PCPs (52%) reported using ultrasound or measurements of α-fetoprotein in surveillance; 96% said that this combination was effective in reducing HCC-related mortality. However, many providers incorrectly believed that clinical examination (45%) or levels of liver enzymes (59%) or α-fetoprotein alone (89%) were effective surveillance tools. CONCLUSIONS: PCPs have misconceptions about tests to detect HCC that contribute to ineffective surveillance. Reported barriers to surveillance include suboptimal knowledge about guidelines, indicating a need for interventions, including provider education, to increase HCC surveillance effectiveness.

Surveillance for hepatocellular carcinoma: how can we do better?

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is the third most common cause of cancer-related death worldwide and one of the most common causes of death in patients with cirrhosis. Although it has a lower incidence in the United States than other countries, its incidence is dramatically on the rise. HCC surveillance is recommended at regular intervals in patients with cirrhosis to detect tumors at an early stage, when curative options exist. Ultrasound and alpha-fetoprotein remain the surveillance tests of choice and should be used in combination every 6 months until better surveillance tools become available. Unfortunately, HCC surveillance continues to be underutilized in clinical practice, with less than 20% of at-risk patients undergoing surveillance. This is related to multiple causes, including underrecognition of liver disease and cirrhosis in approximately 40% of patients; however, the most common reason is a failure to order surveillance in those with known cirrhosis.