Impact of travel burden on the treatment of stage I and II breast cancer: A National Cancer Database analysis.

BACKGROUND: Although historic studies of state registries have demonstrated decreased radiation therapy use for patients with breast cancer living further away from radiation facilities, the association between travel distance and breast cancer treatment in a modern national cohort remains unknown. METHODS: Female patients with estrogen receptor/progesterone receptor positive and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 negative pathologic stages I to II breast cancer were identified from the National Cancer Database (2018-2020) and dichotomized by distance ≤20 miles or >20 miles (75th percentile) from the treatment facility. The association between travel distance and type of surgery and treatment administered was analyzed by univariate and multivariate logistic regression and after 1:1 propensity matching. RESULTS: Of the 293,318 patients identified for inclusion, the median age was 63 years, and most patients (n = 190,567, 65%) lived ≤20 miles of the treatment facility. Patients with a travel burden >20 miles were more likely to receive a mastectomy (≤20 miles 30.4% vs >20 miles 34.0%, P < .001; odds ratio 1.14, P = .016), and less likely to receive radiation (≤20 miles 63.3% vs >20% miles 60.1%, P < .001; odds ratio 0.81, P < .001). These findings persisted after propensity score matching (n = 33,544 per cohort), with patients living further being more likely to undergo a mastectomy (≤20 miles 30.3% vs >20 miles 35.3%, P < .001) and less likely to receive radiation (≤ 20 miles 65.4% vs. >20 miles 58.5%, P < .001). CONCLUSION: Patients with hormone receptor-positive stage I to II breast cancer with a larger travel burden are more likely to receive a mastectomy and less likely to undergo radiation therapy to treat their disease.

Impact of Patient Comorbidities on Presentation Stage of Breast and Colon Cancers.

BACKGROUND: While patients with multiple comorbidities may have frequent contact with medical providers, it is unclear whether their healthcare visits translate into earlier detection of cancers, specifically breast and colon cancers. METHODS: Patients diagnosed with stage I-IV breast ductal carcinoma and colon adenocarcinoma were identified from the National Cancer Database and stratified by comorbidity burden, dichotomized as a Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) Score of <2 or ≥2. Characteristics associated with comorbidities were analyzed by univariate and multivariate logistic regression. Propensity-score matching was performed to determine the impact of CCI on stage at cancer diagnosis, dichotomized as early (I-II) or late (III-IV). RESULTS: A total of 672,032 patients with colon adenocarcinoma and 2,132,889 with breast ductal carcinoma were included. Patients with colon adenocarcinoma who had a CCI ≥ 2 (11%, n = 72,620) were more likely to be diagnosed with early-stage disease (53% vs. 47%; odds ratio [OR] 1.02, p = 0.017), and this finding persisted after propensity matching (CCI ≥ 2 55% vs. CCI < 2 53%, p < 0.001). Patients with breast ductal carcinoma who had a CCI ≥ 2 (4%, n = 85,069) were more likely to be diagnosed with late-stage disease (15% vs. 12%; OR 1.35, p < 0.001). This finding also persisted after propensity matching (CCI ≥ 2 14% vs. CCI < 2 10%, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with more comorbidities are more likely to present with early-stage colon cancers but late-stage breast cancers. This finding may reflect differences in practice patterns for routine screening in these patients. Providers should continue guideline directed screenings to detect cancers at an earlier stage and optimize outcomes.

Radiation, Lymph Node Dissection, or Both: Management of Lymph Node Micrometastases from Merkel Cell Carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Regional lymph node micrometastases from Merkel cell carcinoma (MCC) can be treated with completion lymph node dissection (CLND) and/or radiation therapy (RT). It is unclear how these options compare in terms of survival benefits for patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This retrospective cohort study used data from years 2012-2019 of the National Cancer Database. Patients with MCC and clinically negative, but pathologically positive, lymph node metastases who received RT to and/or CLND of the regional lymph node basin were included. Inverse probability weight balancing was performed using covariates followed by Cox proportional hazards modeling for survival analysis. RESULTS: A total of 962 patients were included [median (interquartile range) age, 74 (67-80) years, 662 (68.8%) male patients, 926 (96.3%) white patients]. The majority (63%, n = 606) had a CLND only, while 18% (n = 173) had RT only, and 19% (n = 183) had both CLND and RT. From 2016 to 2019, usage of RT only increased from 10% to 31.8%. Multivariate analysis demonstrated that treatment modality was not associated with survival [RT versus CLND, hazard ratio (HR) 0.842, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.621-1.142, p = 0.269, RT+CLND versus CLND, HR 1.029, 95% CI 0.775-1.367, p = 0.844]. This persisted after balancing weights (RT versus CLND, HR 0.837, 95% CI 0.614-1.142, p = 0.262, RT+CLND versus CLND, HR 1.085, 95% CI 0.801-1.470, p = 0.599). CONCLUSIONS: The usage of RT for nodal micrometastasis in MCC is increasing as compared with CLND. This strategy appears to be safe, with no significant difference in survival outcomes.

Shifting the Goalpost in Ventral Hernia Care: 5-year Outcomes after Ventral Hernia Repair with Poly-4-hydroxybutyrate Mesh.

PURPOSE: Ventral hernia repair (VHR) can be augmented with biosynthetic poly-4-hydroxybutryate mesh (P4HB). Long-term outcomes, including quality of life outcomes, after VHR with P4HB mesh are not well established. Our study sought to assess these outcomes 5 years after repair. METHODS: Patients who received VHR using P4HB by the senior author between 01/2015 and 09/2017 were retrospectively identified. Patients were prospectively interviewed for quality of life assessment using the Hernia-Related Quality-of-Life Survey (HerQLes) and Abdominal Hernia-Q (AHQ) and screened for recurrence. Those who screened positive were asked to follow up in clinic to confirm recurrence. Both 5-year quality of life and recurrence were univariately assessed with patient and operative factors. RESULTS: 51 patients met inclusion criteria. 43 patients completed 5-year quality of life assessment (84.3% response rate). Quality of life scores at all postoperative time periods were greater than preoperative scores. Further, quality of life at 5 years is greater than that assessed 0-2 years following VHR. Most patients achieve their best quality of life in the 5-year time period. Thirty-five patients had clinical follow-up in the 5-year time period, 7 experienced recurrences (20% recurrence rate). There was no difference in 5-year quality of life assessment between those who had a recurrence and those who did not. CONCLUSION: Patient quality of life following VHR with P4HB improves immediately and continues to improve 5 years following repair. There are no differences in quality of life with onset of recurrence. Quality of life should be the primary outcome of success in VHR.