Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 93
Filter
Add more filters

Country/Region as subject
Publication year range
1.
Cancer Causes Control ; 34(Suppl 1): 171-186, 2023 Dec.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37095280

ABSTRACT

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.


Subject(s)
Breast Neoplasms , Prophylactic Mastectomy , Unilateral Breast Neoplasms , Female , Humans , Mastectomy , Breast Neoplasms/prevention & control , Breast Neoplasms/surgery , Unilateral Breast Neoplasms/surgery , Probability
2.
Cancer Causes Control ; 34(Suppl 1): 23-33, 2023 Dec.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36939948

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: By requiring specific measures, cancer endorsements (e.g., accreditations, designations, certifications) promote high-quality cancer care. While 'quality' is the defining feature, less is known about how these endorsements consider equity. Given the inequities in access to high-quality cancer care, we assessed the extent to which equity structures, processes, and outcomes were required for cancer center endorsements. METHODS: We performed a content analysis of medical oncology, radiation oncology, surgical oncology, and research hospital endorsements from the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO), American Society of Radiation Oncology (ASTRO), American College of Surgeons Commission on Cancer (CoC), and the National Cancer Institute (NCI), respectively. We analyzed requirements for equity-focused content and compared how each endorsing body included equity as a requirement along three axes: structures, processes, and outcomes. RESULTS: ASCO guidelines centered on processes assessing financial, health literacy, and psychosocial barriers to care. ASTRO guidelines related to language needs and processes to address financial barriers. CoC equity-related guidelines focused on processes addressing financial and psychosocial concerns of survivors, and hospital-identified barriers to care. NCI guidelines considered equity related to cancer disparities research, inclusion of diverse groups in outreach and clinical trials, and diversification of investigators. None of the guidelines explicitly required measures of equitable care delivery or outcomes beyond clinical trial enrollment. CONCLUSION: Overall, equity requirements were limited. Leveraging the influence and infrastructure of cancer quality endorsements could enhance progress toward achieving cancer care equity. We recommend that endorsing organizations 1) require cancer centers to implement processes for measuring and tracking health equity outcomes and 2) engage diverse community stakeholders to develop strategies for addressing discrimination.


Subject(s)
Health Equity , Neoplasms , Humans , United States , Neoplasms/therapy , Neoplasms/psychology , Medical Oncology , Delivery of Health Care
3.
Oncology ; 101(12): 808-816, 2023.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37579737

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: The COVID-19 pandemic caused an increase in fear, anxiety, and depressive symptoms globally. For populations at increased risk for adverse outcomes due to illness, such as cancer patients, these worries may have been exacerbated. Understanding how the pandemic impacted cancer patients will inform better preparation for future events that cause disturbances to cancer care delivery. METHODS: This study analyzed data from two surveys to determine whether cancer patients' responses differed from a cancer-free population-based sample in terms of concerns, preventive behaviors, and thoughts on their healthcare provider's communication regarding COVID-19 in a US Midwestern state. In August 2020, a survey was sent to 10,009 Iowans aged 18 and older, randomly selected from the 2018 Iowa voter registration file. In September 2020, a survey was emailed to 2,954 cancer patients aged 18 and older who opted into the University of Iowa Holden Comprehensive Cancer Center's Patients Enhancing Research Collaborations at Holden program. Previously validated and pretested Likert-type and multiple-choice items assessed concern regarding COVID-19, social distancing perception and behaviors, and demographic characteristics of respondents. We used χ2 tests and logistic regression to examine differences between the cancer patient and general population survey responses. RESULTS: We included 3,622 responses from the general population survey and 780 responses from the cancer patient survey in this analysis. Cancer patient survey respondents were more frequently older, lived in urban areas, had Medicare insurance coverage, had a college degree or higher, and were married. Cancer patients were more likely to report engaging in social distancing behaviors and greater concern regarding the pandemic. CONCLUSION: This study suggests differences in the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on cancer patients compared to cancer-free members of the general population. These results indicate the need for consideration of cancer patients' physical and mental health during large-scale disruptions to cancer care.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Neoplasms , Humans , Aged , United States , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , Pandemics , Medicare , Anxiety/epidemiology , Surveys and Questionnaires , Neoplasms/epidemiology
4.
Biom J ; 65(8): e2200213, 2023 12.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37338305

ABSTRACT

Methods for decomposition analyses have been developed to partition between-group differences into explained and unexplained portions. In this paper, we introduce the concept of causal decomposition maps, which allow researchers to test the effect of area-level interventions on disease maps before implementation. These maps quantify the impact of interventions that aim to reduce differences in health outcomes between groups and illustrate how the disease map might change under different interventions. We adapt a new causal decomposition analysis method for the disease mapping context. Through the specification of a Bayesian hierarchical outcome model, we obtain counterfactual small area estimates of age-adjusted rates and reliable estimates of decomposition quantities. We present two formulations of the outcome model, with the second allowing for spatial interference of the intervention. Our method is utilized to determine whether the addition of gyms in different sets of rural ZIP codes could reduce any of the rural-urban difference in age-adjusted colorectal cancer incidence rates in Iowa ZIP codes.


Subject(s)
Health Inequities , Bayes Theorem , Incidence , Iowa
5.
J Psychosoc Oncol ; : 1-16, 2023 Aug 17.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37587850

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: This study was designed to examine (1) whether ovarian cancer (OC) survivors would have greater well-being vs. elevated distress compared to community members during a universal health stressor (COVID-19) and (2) how resources and risk factors at diagnosis predicted vulnerability to a subsequent health-related stressor. METHODS: One hundred seventeen OC survivors were recruited from two academic medical centers and compared to a community-based sample on COVID-related distress and disruption. Latent class analysis identified differentially impacted groups of survivors. RESULTS: Survivors reported lower distress than community members. Predictors of higher distress included shorter-term survivorship, greater disruption, and poorer emotional well--being (EWB) at diagnosis. Survivors were divided into high- and low-COVID-19-impact subgroups; high-impact individuals endorsed higher perceived stress and lower EWB at diagnosis. CONCLUSION: Survivors reported lower COVID-related distress than community participants. While depression at diagnosis did not predict later distress, EWB was a strong predictor of response to a novel health-related stressor.

6.
Ann Surg Oncol ; 29(4): 2527-2536, 2022 Apr.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35067792

ABSTRACT

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.


Subject(s)
Neoplasms , Quality Indicators, Health Care , Accreditation , Health Facility Size , Hospitals , Humans , Neoplasms/therapy , Retrospective Studies
7.
Dis Colon Rectum ; 65(7): 876-884, 2022 07 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35001047

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Despite evidence of superior outcomes for rectal cancer at high-volume, multidisciplinary cancer centers, many patients undergo surgery in low-volume hospitals. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to examine considerations of former patients with rectal cancer when selecting their surgeon and to evaluate which considerations were associated with surgery at high-volume hospitals. DESIGN: In this retrospective cohort study, patients were surveyed about what they considered when selecting a cancer surgeon. SETTINGS: Study data were obtained via survey and the statewide Iowa Cancer Registry. PATIENTS: All eligible individuals diagnosed with invasive stages II/III rectal cancer from 2013 to 2017 identified through the registry were invited to participate. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcomes were the characteristics of the hospital where they received surgery (ie, National Cancer Institute designation, Commission on Cancer accreditation, and rectal cancer surgery volume). RESULTS: Among respondents, 318 of 417 (76%) completed surveys. Sixty-nine percent of patients selected their surgeon based on their physician's referral/recommendation, 20% based on surgeon/hospital reputation, and 11% based on personal connections to the surgeon. Participants who chose their surgeon based on reputation had significantly higher odds of surgery at National Cancer Institute-designated (OR 7.5; 95% CI, 3.8-15.0) or high-volume (OR 2.6; 95% CI, 1.2-5.7) hospitals than those who relied on referral. LIMITATIONS: This study took place in a Midwestern state with a predominantly white population, which limited our ability to evaluate racial/ethnic associations. CONCLUSION: Most patients with rectal cancer relied on referrals in selecting their surgeon, and those who did were less likely to receive surgery at a National Cancer Institute-designated or high-volume hospitals compared to those who considered reputation. Future research is needed to determine the impact of these decision factors on clinical outcomes, patient satisfaction, and quality of life. In addition, patients should be aware that relying on physician referral may not result in treatment from the most experienced or comprehensive care setting in their area. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B897.REMISIONES Y CONSIDERACIONES PARA LA TOMA DE DECISIONES RELACIONADAS CON LA SELECCIÓN DE UN CIRUJANO PARA EL TRATAMIENTO DEL CÁNCER DE RECTO EN EL MEDIO OESTE DE LOS ESTADOS UNIDOSANTECEDENTES:A pesar de la evidencia de resultados superiores para el tratamiento del cáncer de recto en centros oncológicos de gran volumen y multidisciplinarios, muchos pacientes se someten a cirugía en hospitales de bajo volumen.OBJETIVOS:Examinar las consideraciones de los antiguos pacientes con cáncer de recto al momento de seleccionar a su cirujano y evaluar qué consideraciones se asociaron con la cirugía en hospitales de gran volumen.DISEÑO:Encuestamos a los pacientes sobre qué aspectos consideraron al elegir un cirujano oncológico para completar este estudio de cohorte retrospectivo.AJUSTE:Los datos del estudio se obtuvieron mediante una encuesta y el Registro de Cáncer del estado de Iowa.PACIENTES:Se invitó a participar a todas las personas elegibles diagnosticadas con cáncer de recto invasivo en estadios II/III entre 2013 y 2017 identificadas a través del registro.PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE RESULTADO:Los resultados principales fueron las características del hospital donde fue realizada la cirugía (es decir, designación del Instituto Nacional del Cáncer, acreditación de la Comisión de Cáncer y volumen de cirugía del cáncer de recto).RESULTADOS:Hubo 318 de 417 (76%) encuestas completadas. El sesenta y nueve por ciento seleccionó a su cirujano en función de la referencia / recomendación de su médico, el 20% por la reputación del cirujano/hospital, y el 11% por sus conexiones personales con el cirujano. Los participantes que eligieron a su cirujano en función a la reputación tuvieron probabilidades significativamente más altas de cirugía en el Instituto Nacional del Cáncer designado (OR = 7,5, IC del 95%: 3,8-15,0) o en hospitales de alto volumen (OR = 2,6, IC del 95%: 1,2-5,7) que aquellos que dependían de la derivación.LIMITACIONES:Este estudio se llevó a cabo en un estado del medio oeste con una población predominantemente blanca, lo que limitó nuestra capacidad para evaluar las asociaciones raciales/étnicas.CONCLUSIONES:La mayoría de los pacientes con cáncer de recto dependían de las derivaciones para seleccionar a su cirujano, y los que lo hacían tenían menos probabilidades de recibir cirugía en un hospital designado por el Instituto Nacional del Cáncer o en hospitales de gran volumen en comparación con los que consideraban la reputación. Se necesitan investigaciones a futuro para determinar el impacto de estos factores de decisión en los resultados clínicos, la satisfacción del paciente y la calidad de vida. Además, los pacientes deben ser conscientes de que depender de la remisión de un médico puede no resultar en el tratamiento más experimentado o integral en su área. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B897. (Traducción-Dr Osvaldo Gauto).


Subject(s)
Rectal Neoplasms , Surgeons , Humans , Midwestern United States , Quality of Life , Rectal Neoplasms/diagnosis , Rectal Neoplasms/surgery , Referral and Consultation , Retrospective Studies
8.
J Community Health ; 47(5): 783-789, 2022 10.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35715576

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Rates of adolescent human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination remain low, despite decades of safety and effectiveness data. We sought to quantify the extent of missed opportunities (MOs) for HPV vaccination among adolescents ages 11 to 13 in Iowa and compare the number of these MOs by gender and rurality. METHODS: Medical claims data from a midwestern insurance provider were used to calculate total numbers of MOs for HPV vaccination for adolescents with continuous health insurance enrollment between ages 11 and 13 (n = 14,505). We divided MOs into several categories: total, among non-initiators, occurring before initiation, occurring after the first dose, and occurring between first and last dose. Finally, we used t-tests to perform subgroup comparisons (urban vs. rural; male vs. female). RESULTS: Over half of adolescents failed to initiate vaccination by age 13. The majority of MOs occurred prior to initiation. Urban adolescents had more MOs than rural counterparts and males tended to have more MOs than females. Females experienced significantly fewer overall MOs than males 5.98 (SD = 5.49) compared to 6.18 (SD = 6.04) for males. Additionally, among non-initiators, urban females had significantly more MOs overall (M = 7.13; SD = 6.41) compared to rural females (M = 6.58; SD = 5.51). CONCLUSIONS: Results highlight the extent of MOs that occur at the critical time period between ages 11 and 13. A lack of opportunity was not the barrier to HPV vaccination, particularly among both males and urban adolescents. It will be critical for providers to use known strategies to reduce MOs and utilize all adolescent visits to ensure vaccination is completed by age 13.


Subject(s)
Papillomavirus Infections , Papillomavirus Vaccines , Adolescent , Child , Female , Humans , Insurance, Health , Iowa , Male , Papillomavirus Infections/prevention & control , Papillomavirus Vaccines/therapeutic use , Vaccination
9.
Prev Chronic Dis ; 19: E15, 2022 03 31.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35358035

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: The COVID-19 pandemic has prevented many adolescents from receiving their vaccines, including the human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine, on time. However, little is known about the impact of the pandemic on implementation of clinic-level evidence-based interventions (EBIs) that help to improve HPV vaccine uptake. In this qualitative study, we explored the pandemic's impact on EBI implementation and HPV vaccine delivery. METHODS: During August-November 2020, we interviewed clinic managers in a rural, midwestern state about their experiences implementing EBIs for HPV vaccination during the COVID-19 pandemic. We used a multipronged sampling approach with both stratified and purposive sampling to recruit participants from Vaccines for Children clinics. We then conducted a thematic analysis of transcripts. RESULTS: In interviews (N = 18), 2 primary themes emerged: decreased opportunities for HPV vaccination and disruption to HPV-related implementation work. Most participants reported decreases in opportunities to vaccinate caused by structural changes in how they delivered care (eg, switched to telehealth visits) and patient fear of exposure to COVID-19. Disruptions to EBI implementation were primarily due to logistical challenges (eg, decreases in staffing) and shifting priorities. CONCLUSION: During the pandemic, clinics struggled to provide routine care, and as a result, many adolescents missed HPV vaccinations. To ensure these adolescents do not fall behind on this vaccine series, providers and researchers will need to recommit to EBI implementation and use existing strategies to promote vaccination. In the long term, improvements are needed to make EBI implementation more resilient to ensure that progress does not come to a halt in future pandemic events.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Papillomavirus Infections , Papillomavirus Vaccines , Adolescent , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , Child , Evidence-Based Medicine , Humans , Pandemics/prevention & control , Papillomavirus Infections/epidemiology , Papillomavirus Infections/prevention & control , Vaccination
10.
Ann Surg ; 274(4): e336-e344, 2021 10 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31714306

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To determine factors associated with rectal cancer surgery performed at high-volume hospitals (HVHs) and by high-volume surgeons (HVSs), including the roles of rurality and diagnostic colonoscopy provider characteristics. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Although higher-volume hospitals/surgeons often achieve superior surgical outcomes, many rectal cancer resections are performed by lower-volume hospitals/surgeons, especially among rural populations. METHODS: Patients age 66+ diagnosed from 2007 to 2011 with stage II/III primary rectal adenocarcinoma were selected from surveillance, epidemiology, and end results-medicare data. Patient ZIP codes were used to classify rural status. Hierarchical logistic regression was used to determine factors associated with surgery by HVH and HVS. RESULTS: Of 1601 patients, 22% were rural and 78% were urban. Fewer rural patients received surgery at a HVH compared to urban patients (44% vs 65%; P < 0.0001). Compared to urban patients, rural patients more often had colonoscopies performed by general surgeons (and less often from gastroenterologists or colorectal surgeons), and lived substantially further from HVHs; these factors were both associated with lower odds of surgery at a HVH or by a HVS. In addition, whereas over half of both rural and urban patients received their colonoscopy and surgery at the same hospital, rural patients who stayed at the same hospital were significantly less likely to receive surgery at a HVH or by a HVS compared to urban patients. CONCLUSIONS: Rural rectal cancer patients are less likely to receive surgery from a HVH/HVS. The role of the colonoscopy provider has important implications for referral patterns and initiatives seeking to increase centralization.


Subject(s)
Adenocarcinoma/surgery , Colonoscopy , Health Services Accessibility , Medicare , Rectal Neoplasms/surgery , Rural Population , Adenocarcinoma/pathology , Aged , Female , Hospitals, High-Volume , Humans , Logistic Models , Male , Patient Selection , Rectal Neoplasms/pathology , Referral and Consultation , Retrospective Studies , SEER Program , Treatment Outcome , United States
11.
Breast Cancer Res Treat ; 188(1): 191-202, 2021 Jul.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33582888

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: Iowa is among several rural Midwestern states with the highest proportions of contralateral prophylactic mastectomy (CPM) in women < 45 years of age. We evaluated the role of rurality and travel distance in these surgical patterns. METHODS: Women with unilateral breast cancer (2007-2017) were identified using Iowa Cancer Registry records. Patients and treating hospitals were classified as metro, nonmetro, and rural based on Rural-Urban Continuum Codes. Differences in patient, tumor, and treatment characteristics and median travel distance (MTD) were compared. Characteristics associated with CPM were evaluated with multivariate logistic regression. RESULTS: 22,158 women were identified: 57% metro, 26% nonmetro and 18% rural. Young rural women had the highest proportion of CPM (52%, 39% and 40% for rural, metro, nonmetro women < 40 years). Half of all rural women had surgery at metro hospitals; these women had the longest MTD (62 miles). Among all women treated at metro hospitals, rural women had the highest proportion of CPM (17% rural vs 14% metro/nonmetro, p = 0.007). On multivariate analysis, traveling ≥ 50 miles (ORs 1.43-2.34) and rural residence (OR = 1.29) were independently predictive of CPM. Other risk factors were young age (< 40 years: OR = 7.28, 95% CI 5.97-8.88) and surgery at a metro hospital that offers reconstruction (OR = 2.30, 95% CI 1.65-3.21) and is not NCI-designated (OR = 2.34, 95% CI 1.92-2.86). CONCLUSION: There is an unexpectedly high proportion of CPM in young rural women in Iowa, and travel distance and availability of reconstructive services likely influence decision-making. Improving access to multidisciplinary care in rural states may help optimize decision-making.


Subject(s)
Breast Neoplasms , Prophylactic Mastectomy , Adult , Breast Neoplasms/surgery , Female , Humans , Mastectomy , Registries , Rural Population
12.
Ann Surg Oncol ; 28(2): 632-638, 2021 Feb.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32712893

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Cancer patients treated in community hospitals receive less guideline-recommended care and experience poorer outcomes than those treated in academic medical centers or National Cancer Institute-Designated Cancer Centers. The Markey Cancer Center Affiliate Network (MCCAN) was designed to address this issue in Kentucky, the state with the highest cancer incidence and mortality rates in the U.S. METHODS: Using data obtained from the Kentucky Cancer Registry, the study evaluated the impact of patients treated in MCCAN hospitals on four evidence-based Commission on Cancer (CoC) quality measures using a before-and-after matched-cohort study design. Each group included 13 hospitals matched for bed size, cancer patient volume, community population, and region (Appalachian vs. non-Appalachian). Compliance with quality measures was assessed for the 3 years before the hospital joined MCCAN (T1) and the 3 years afterward (T2). RESULTS: In T1, the control hospitals demonstrated greater compliance with two quality measures than the MCCAN hospitals. In T2, the MCCAN hospitals achieved greater compliance in three measures than the control hospitals. From T1 to T2, the MCCAN hospitals significantly increased compliance on three measures (vs. 1 measure for the control hospitals). Although most of the hospitals were not accredited by the CoC in T1, 92% of the MCCAN hospitals had achieved accreditation by the end of T2 compared with 23% of the control hospitals. CONCLUSION: After the MCCAN hospitals joined the Network, their compliance with quality measures and achievement of CoC accreditation increased significantly compared with the control hospitals. The unique academic/community-collaboration model provided by MCCAN was able to make a significant impact on improvement of cancer care. Future research is needed to adapt and evaluate similar interventions in other states and regions.


Subject(s)
Hospitals, Community , Neoplasms , Accreditation , Cancer Care Facilities , Cohort Studies , Humans , National Cancer Institute (U.S.) , Neoplasms/epidemiology , Neoplasms/therapy , United States
13.
J Surg Res ; 260: 46-55, 2021 04.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33316759

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Primary gastrointestinal (GI) melanomas, compared with cutaneous melanomas, have a much lower incidence. As a result, there is a paucity of data regarding their presentation, treatment, and prognosis. The aim of this study was to analyze the incidence, patient characteristics, treatment patterns, and survival of primary GI melanomas in comparison with cutaneous melanomas using a population-based cohort. METHODS: Patients diagnosed with primary GI and cutaneous melanomas were identified from Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results 1973-2016 data. RESULTS: A total of 872 primary GI melanomas and 319,327 cutaneous melanomas were identified. GI melanoma incidence increased by an annual percent change of 1.82 (P < 0.05) during the study period. The most common sites for GI melanoma were the anus (50%) and rectum (34%). Compared to cutaneous melanoma, patients diagnosed with GI melanomas were older, women (58% versus 45%), non-White (16% versus 6%), and presented with a higher stage (36% versus 4% distant stage, all P < 0.001). GI melanomas had significantly worse cancer-specific survival (CSS) than cutaneous melanoma. Despite the poor prognosis, the CSS has increased in recent years. Among patients with anorectal melanomas, local excision with chemotherapy and/or radiation had a similar CSS compared with those with major surgery only. CONCLUSIONS: Despite a steady increasing incidence since 1975, GI melanomas are rare, present with advanced stages, and have worse outcomes than cutaneous melanomas. The improved prognosis of these tumors in recent years might reflect the impact of novel targeted treatments and the more common use of local tumor excision over major resections.


Subject(s)
Gastrointestinal Neoplasms/diagnosis , Gastrointestinal Neoplasms/therapy , Melanoma/diagnosis , Melanoma/therapy , Practice Patterns, Physicians'/trends , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Chemotherapy, Adjuvant , Digestive System Surgical Procedures , Female , Gastrointestinal Neoplasms/epidemiology , Humans , Incidence , Male , Melanoma/epidemiology , Middle Aged , Prognosis , Radiotherapy, Adjuvant , SEER Program , Survival Analysis , United States/epidemiology , Young Adult
14.
J Surg Res ; 258: 370-380, 2021 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33051062

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Patients with rectal cancer treated at specialized or high-volume hospitals have better outcomes, but a minority of these patients are treated there. Physician recommendations are important considerations for patients with rectal cancer when making treatment decisions, yet little is known about the factors that affect these physician referral patterns. METHODS: Semistructured telephone interviews were conducted in 2018-2019 with Iowa gastroenterologists (GIs) and general surgeons (GSs) who performed colonoscopies in a community setting. A thematic approach was used to analyze and code qualitative data. RESULTS: We interviewed 10 GIs and 6 GSs with self-reported averages of 15.5 y in practice, 1100 endoscopic procedures annually, and 6 rectal cancer diagnoses annually. Physicians believed surgeon experience and colorectal specialization were directly related to positive outcomes in rectal cancer resections. Most GSs performed resections on patients they diagnosed and typically only referred patients to colorectal surgeons (CRS) in complex cases. Conversely, GIs generally referred to CRS in all cases. Adhering to existing referral patterns due to the pressure of health care networks was a salient theme for both GIs and GSs. CONCLUSIONS: While respondents believe that high volume/specialization is related to improved surgical outcomes, referral recommendations are heavily influenced by existing referral networks. Referral practices also differ by diagnosing specialty and suggest rural patients may be less likely to be referred to a CRS because more GSs perform colonoscopies in rural areas and tend to keep patients for resection. System-level interventions that target referral networks may improve rectal cancer outcomes at the population level.


Subject(s)
Gastroenterologists/psychology , Rectal Neoplasms/surgery , Referral and Consultation , Surgeons/psychology , Female , Gastroenterologists/statistics & numerical data , Humans , Interviews as Topic , Male , Practice Patterns, Physicians' , Surgeons/statistics & numerical data
15.
Support Care Cancer ; 29(12): 7913-7924, 2021 Dec.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34191127

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: Care coordination is a strategy to reduce healthcare navigation challenges for cancer patients. The objectives of this study were to assess the association between having a cancer care coordinator (CCC) and long-term health-related quality of life (HRQoL), and to evaluate whether this association differed by level of health literacy. METHODS: A population-based sample of survivors diagnosed with breast, prostate, or colorectal cancer in 2015 from the Iowa Cancer Registry participated in an online survey conducted in 2017-2018 (N = 368). Chi-squared tests and logistic regression were used to model the association between patient characteristics and having a cancer care coordinator. Linear regression was used to model the association between patient perception of having a cancer care coordinator and post-treatment physical or mental HRQoL by differing levels of health literacy while controlling for sociodemographic and clinical factors. RESULTS: Most survivors (81%) reported having one healthcare professional who coordinated their cancer care. Overall, patient perception of having a coordinator was not significantly associated with physical HRQoL (p = 0.118). However, participants with low health literacy (21%) who had a coordinator had significantly higher physical HRQoL scores compared to those who did not (adjusted mean difference 5.2, p = 0.010), while not so for medium (29%) or high (51%) health literacy (p = 0.227, and p = 0.850, respectively; test for interaction p = 0.001). Mental HRQoL was not associated with having a coordinator in our analyses. CONCLUSION: Findings suggest that care coordinators improved post-treatment physical HRQoL, particularly for participants with low health literacy. Care coordinators may be beneficial to the most vulnerable patients struggling to navigate the complex healthcare system during cancer treatment. Future research should focus on the mechanisms by which care coordination may affect post-treatment HRQoL.


Subject(s)
Cancer Survivors , Health Literacy , Neoplasms , Humans , Male , Neoplasms/therapy , Quality of Life , Surveys and Questionnaires , Survivors
16.
J Natl Compr Canc Netw ; 18(6): 689-699, 2020 06.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32502984

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: National guidelines recommend chemotherapy as the mainstay of treatment for stage IV colon cancer, with primary tumor resection (PTR) reserved for patients with symptomatic primary or curable disease. The aims of this study were to characterize the treatment modalities received by patients with stage IV colon cancer and to determine the patient-, tumor-, and hospital-level factors associated with those treatments. METHODS: Patients diagnosed with stage IV colon cancer in 2014 were extracted from the SEER Patterns of Care initiative. Treatments were categorized into chemotherapy only, PTR only, PTR + chemotherapy, and none/unknown. RESULTS: The total weighted number of cases was 3,336; 17% of patients received PTR only, 23% received chemotherapy only, 41% received PTR + chemotherapy, and 17% received no treatment. In multivariable analyses, compared with chemotherapy only, PTR + chemotherapy was associated with being married (odds ratio [OR], 1.9), having bowel obstruction (OR, 2.55), and having perforation (OR, 2.29), whereas older age (OR, 5.95), Medicaid coverage (OR, 2.46), higher T stage (OR, 3.51), and higher N stage (OR, 6.77) were associated with PTR only. Patients who received no treatment did not have more comorbidities or more severe disease burden but were more likely to be older (OR, 3.91) and non-Hispanic African American (OR, 2.92; all P<.05). Treatment at smaller, nonacademic hospitals was associated with PTR (± chemotherapy). CONCLUSIONS: PTR was included in the treatment regimen for most patients with stage IV colon cancer and was associated with smaller, nonacademic hospitals. Efforts to improve guideline implementation may be beneficial in these hospitals and also in non-Hispanic African American and older populations.


Subject(s)
Colonic Neoplasms/therapy , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Neoplasm Staging , United States
17.
Cancer ; 125(13): 2283-2290, 2019 07 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30901085

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Cancer survival rates in adolescents and young adults (AYAs) have shown slow improvements in comparison with other age groups, and this may be due to lower participation in clinical trials. Little evidence has been provided regarding how nonmetropolitan residence may influence clinical trial enrollment for AYAs with cancer. This study sought to determine whether AYAs from nonmetropolitan areas have lower rates of clinical trial enrollment than their urban counterparts and to examine factors associated with enrollment variation. METHODS: Data from the National Cancer Institute's 2006 and 2013 Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Patterns of Care AYA cohorts were analyzed. Patients with acute lymphoblastic leukemia, Hodgkin lymphoma, non-Hodgkin lymphoma, and sarcoma were included (n = 3155). Urban influence codes were used to measure the rurality of the county of residence at diagnosis, which was categorized as large metropolitan, small metropolitan, or nonmetropolitan. Logistic regression compared trial participants and nonparticipants while adjusting for patient and provider factors. RESULTS: Compared with AYAs from large metropolitan counties, AYAs from small metropolitan (odds ratio [OR], 2.04; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.57-2.64) or nonmetropolitan counties (OR, 1.86; 95% CI, 1.23-2.81) experienced greater trial enrollment. AYAs treated at a hospital with a residency program (OR, 2.27; 95% CI, 1.63-3.16) or by a pediatric oncologist (OR, 4.02; 95% CI, 3.03-5.32) were associated with greater enrollment. There was a significant interaction between rurality and hospital size, which had the greatest impact on nonmetropolitan enrollment. CONCLUSIONS: Clinical trial enrollment was higher among AYAs from nonmetropolitan counties than those from metropolitan counties, predominantly when they were treated at large hospitals.


Subject(s)
Clinical Trials as Topic/statistics & numerical data , Neoplasms/diagnosis , Neoplasms/epidemiology , Patient Participation/trends , Research Subjects/statistics & numerical data , Rural Population/statistics & numerical data , Urban Population/statistics & numerical data , Adolescent , Adult , Child , Female , Follow-Up Studies , Humans , Male , Patient Participation/psychology , Population Surveillance , Prognosis , Research Subjects/psychology , United States/epidemiology , Young Adult
18.
Cancer Causes Control ; 30(7): 721-732, 2019 Jul.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31119434

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: Recent advances in head and neck cancer (HNC) treatment, such as increased use of organ-preserving advanced radiation treatments, the approval of cetuximab for HNC treatment, and the increase in human papillomavirus (HPV)-related HNC, have changed clinical approaches to HNC management. We sought to identify treatment trends in a population-based cohort of HNC patients. METHODS: The Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Patterns of Care program collected additional treatment and HPV testing information on stratified random samples of HNC patients diagnosed in 1997 (n = 473), 2004 (n = 1,317), and 2009 (n = 1,128). Rao-Scott Chi-square tests were used to examine unadjusted associations between year of diagnosis and patient sociodemographic, tumor, and treatment characteristics. Cochran-Armitage tests for trend were used to examine the hypothesis that certain treatments were used increasingly (or decreasingly) over the time period, while logistic regression was used to examine factors associated with particular treatments. RESULTS: Use of radiation and chemotherapy without surgery significantly increased for all HNC sites between 1997 and 2009. Cetuximab and taxane use also showed a significantly increasing trend. Lack of insurance was associated with not receiving treatment in multivariate models. The majority (64%) of cases undergoing radiation in 2009 received an advanced treatment, with 55% receiving intensity modulated. The majority of oropharyngeal cases with known HPV status received chemotherapy and radiation only (62%) and nearly all were insured and had one or fewer comorbidities. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment patterns have changed for HNC, leading to increased incorporation of systemic therapy and newer radiation techniques. HPV testing should be targeted for more widespread use, especially in traditionally underserved groups.


Subject(s)
Head and Neck Neoplasms/therapy , Papillomavirus Infections/diagnosis , Cohort Studies , Comorbidity , Female , Head and Neck Neoplasms/epidemiology , Head and Neck Neoplasms/virology , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Papillomaviridae , SEER Program
19.
Dis Colon Rectum ; 62(10): 1186-1194, 2019 10.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31490827

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Many patients with rectal cancer are treated at small, low-volume hospitals despite evidence that better outcomes are associated with larger, high-volume hospitals. OBJECTIVES: This study aims to examine trends of patients with rectal cancer who are receiving care at large hospitals, to determine the patient characteristics associated with treatment at large hospitals, and to assess the relationships between treatment at large hospitals and guideline-recommended therapy. DESIGN: This study was a retrospective cohort analysis to assess trends in rectal cancer treatment. SETTINGS: Data from the National Cancer Institute's Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Patterns of Care studies were used. PATIENTS: The study population consisted of adults diagnosed with stages II/III rectal cancer in 1990/1991, 1995, 2000, 2005, 2010, and 2015. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was treatment at large hospitals (≥500 beds). The receipt of guideline-recommended preoperative chemoradiation therapy and postoperative chemotherapy was assessed for patients diagnosed in 2005+. RESULTS: Two thousand two hundred thirty-one patients were included. The proportion treated at large hospitals increased from 19% in 1990/1991 to 27% in 2015 (ptrend < 0.0001). Black race was associated with treatment at large hospitals (vs white) (OR, 1.73; 95% CI, 1.30-2.31), as was being 55 to 64 years of age (vs 75+), and diagnosis in 2015 (vs 1990/1991). Treatment in large hospitals was associated with twice the odds of preoperative chemoradiation, as well as younger age and diagnosis in 2010 or 2015 (vs 2005). LIMITATIONS: The study did not account for the change in the number of large hospitals over time. CONCLUSIONS: Results suggest that patients with rectal cancer are increasingly being treated in large hospitals where they receive more guideline-recommended therapy. Although this trend is promising, patients receiving care at larger, higher-volume facilities are still the minority. Initiatives increasing patient and provider awareness of benefits of specialized care, as well as increasing referrals to large centers may improve the use of recommended treatment and ultimately improve outcomes. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/A994. QUIMIORRADIACIÓN RECOMENDADA EN GUÍAS PARA PACIENTES CON CÁNCER RECTAL EN HOSPITALES DE GRAN TAMAÑO: UNA TENDENCIA EN LA DIRECCIÓN CORRECTA: Muchos pacientes con cáncer rectal se tratan en hospitales pequeños y de bajo volumen a pesar de evidencia de que los mejores resultados se asocian con hospitales más grandes y de gran volumen. OBJETIVOS: Examinar las tendencias en los pacientes con cáncer rectal que reciben atención en hospitales de gran tamaño, determinar las características de los pacientes asociadas con el tratamiento en hospitales grandes y evaluar la relación entre el tratamiento en hospitales grandes y la terapia recomendada en guías. DISEÑO:: Este estudio fue un análisis de cohorte retrospectivo para evaluar las tendencias en el tratamiento del cáncer de recto. ESCENARIO: Se utilizaron datos de los estudios del programa Patrones de Atención, Vigilancia, Epidemiología y Resultados Finales (SEER) del Instituto Nacional de Cáncer (NIH). PACIENTES: La población de estudio consistió en adultos diagnosticados con cáncer rectal en estadio II / III en 1990/1991, 1995, 2000, 2005, 2010 y 2015. PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE RESULTADO: El resultado primario fue el tratamiento en hospitales grandes (≥500 camas). La recepción de quimiorradiación preoperatoria recomendada según las guías y la quimioterapia posoperatoria se evaluaron para los pacientes diagnosticados en 2005 y posteriormente. RESULTADOS: Se incluyeron 2,231 pacientes. La proporción tratada en los hospitales grandes aumentó del 19% en 1990/1991 al 27% en 2015 (ptrend < 0.0001). La raza afroamericana se asoció con el tratamiento en hospitales grandes (vs. blanca) (OR, 1.73; IC 95%, 1.30-2.31), al igual que 55-64 años de edad (vs ≥75) y diagnóstico en 2015 (vs 1990/1991). El tratamiento en los hospitales grandes se asoció con el doble de probabilidad de quimiorradiación preoperatoria, así como con una edad más temprana y diagnóstico en 2010 o 2015 (vs 2005). LIMITACIONES: El estudio no tomó en cuenta el cambio en el número de hospitales grandes a lo largo del tiempo. CONCLUSIONES: Los resultados sugieren que los pacientes con cáncer rectal reciben cada vez más tratamiento en hospitales grandes donde reciben terapia recomendada por las guías mas frecuentemente. Aunque esta tendencia es prometedora, los pacientes que reciben atención en hospitales más grandes y de mayor volumen siguen siendo una minoría. Las iniciativas que aumenten la concientización del paciente y del proveedor de servicios médicos sobre los beneficios de la atención especializada, así como el aumento de las referencias a centros grandes podrían mejorar el uso del tratamiento recomendado y, en última instancia, mejorar los resultados. Vea el Resumen en video en http://links.lww.com/DCR/A994.


Subject(s)
Antineoplastic Agents/therapeutic use , Hospitals, High-Volume/statistics & numerical data , Neoplasm Staging , Practice Guidelines as Topic/standards , Rectal Neoplasms/therapy , SEER Program , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , Chemoradiotherapy , Female , Follow-Up Studies , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Prognosis , Rectal Neoplasms/diagnosis , Rectal Neoplasms/epidemiology , Retrospective Studies , Survival Rate/trends , United States/epidemiology , Young Adult
20.
Cancer ; 124(7): 1483-1491, 2018 04 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29338082

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Small tumor diagnostic tools including ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration (FNA) and computed tomography (CT) could be causing rising and racially/ethnically different thyroid cancer incidence rates due to variable overdiagnosis of indolent tumors. Papillary tumors and <40 mm tumors are most likely to be overdiagnosed as indolent tumors by FNA and CT. METHODS: Age-adjusted incidence rates (AAIRs) for the years 2007-2014 were calculated for race/ethnicity (white, Hispanic, Asian, African American, Native American) by patient/tumor characteristics for microscopically confirmed malignant thyroid cancer cases in the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Program 18 database (SEER 18; N = 93,607). Multivariate analysis determined cancer patients' odds ratios of diagnosis with papillary thyroid carcinoma (vs other histologies) and tumors <40 mm (vs ≥40 mm). RESULTS: For both males and females, there were statistically significant differences in incidence rates between race/ethnicity, with whites having the highest AAIRs and African Americans the lowest AAIRs. Among thyroid cancer patients, tumor size and histology differed significantly by race and insurance coverage after controlling for age, sex, stage, and tumor sequence. Non-whites with thyroid cancer (vs whites) were less associated with small tumors (odds ratio [OR], 0.51-0.79; P < .0001). Medicaid and uninsured patients with thyroid cancer were less associated with tumors <40 mm (OR, 0.55-0.71; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.49-0.76) and papillary carcinoma (OR, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.80-0.93). CONCLUSION: The diagnosis of small tumors is occurring at greater rates in whites (vs non-whites) and insured (vs Medicaid and uninsured) patients; consequently, these groups may be vulnerable to unnecessary tests and treatments or potentially aided by early detection. Guidelines that define postdetection interventions may be needed to limit the overtreatment of indolent and small papillary carcinomas. Cancer 2018;124:1483-91. © 2018 American Cancer Society.


Subject(s)
Adenocarcinoma, Follicular/epidemiology , Carcinoma, Medullary/epidemiology , Carcinoma, Papillary/epidemiology , Ethnicity/statistics & numerical data , Racial Groups/statistics & numerical data , Thyroid Neoplasms/epidemiology , Adenocarcinoma, Follicular/diagnosis , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Carcinoma, Medullary/diagnosis , Carcinoma, Papillary/diagnosis , Cohort Studies , Female , Follow-Up Studies , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Prognosis , Thyroid Neoplasms/diagnosis , Time Factors , United States/epidemiology , Young Adult
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL