Racial Disparities in Treatment for Rectal Cancer at Minority-Serving Hospitals

Racial comparisons in treatment of rectal adenocarcinoma and survival in the military health system

BACKGROUND

Racial disparities in treatment and outcomes of rectal cancer have been attributed to patients' differential access to care. We aimed to study treatment and outcomes of rectal cancer in the equal access Military Health System (MHS) to better understand potential racial disparities.

METHODS

We accessed the MilCanEpi database to study a cohort of patients aged 18 and older who were diagnosed with rectal adenocarcinoma between 1998 and 2014. Receipt of guideline recommended treatment per tumor stage, cancer recurrence, and all-cause death were compared between non-Hispanic White and Black patients using multivariable regression models with associations expressed as odds (AORs) or hazard ratios (AHRs) and their 95% confidence intervals (CIs).

RESULTS

The study included 171 Black and 845 White patients with rectal adenocarcinoma. Overall, there were no differences in receipt of guideline concordant treatment (AOR = 0.76, 95% CI = 0.45 to 1.29), recurrence (AHR = 1.34, 95% CI = 0.85 to 2.12), or survival (AHR = 1.08, 95% CI = 0.77 to 1.54) for Black patients compared with White patients. However, Black patients younger than 50 years of age at diagnosis (AOR = 0.34, 95% CI = 0.13 to 0.90) or with stage III or IV tumors (AOR = 0.28, 95% CI = 0.12 to 0.64) were less likely to receive guideline recommended treatment than White patients in stratified analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

In the equal access MHS, although there were no overall racial disparities in rectal cancer treatment or clinical outcomes between Black and White patients, disparities among those with early-onset or late-stage rectal cancers were noted. This suggests that factors other than access to care may play a role in the observed disparities and warrants further research.

Disparities in Surgical Treatment of Resectable Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma at Minority Serving Hospitals

INTRODUCTION

Minority serving hospitals (MSH) are those serving a disproportionally high number of minority patients. Previous research has demonstrated that treatment at MSH is associated with worse outcomes. We hypothesize that patients treated at MSH are less likely to undergo surgical resection of pancreatic adenocarcinoma compared to patients treated at non-MSH.

METHODS

Patients with resectable pancreatic cancer were identified using the National Cancer Database. Institutions treating Black and Hispanic patients in the top decile were categorized as an MSH. Factors associated with the primary outcome of definitive surgical resection were evaluated using multivariable logistic regression. Univariate and multivariable survival analysis was performed.

RESULTS

Of the 75,513 patients included in this study, 7.2% were treated at MSH. Patients treated at MSH were younger, more likely to be uninsured, and higher stage compared to those treated at non-MSH (P < 0.001). Patients treated at MSH underwent surgical resection at lower rates (MSH 40% versus non-MSH 44.5%, P < 0.001). On multivariable logistic regression, treatment at MSH was associated with decreased likelihood of undergoing definitive surgery (odds ratio 0.91, P = 0.006). Of those who underwent surgical resection, multivariable survival analysis revealed that treatment at an MSH was associated with increased morality (hazard ratio 1.12, P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with resectable pancreatic adenocarcinoma treated at MSH are less likely to undergo surgical resection compared to those treated at non-MSH. Targeted interventions are needed to address the unique barriers facing MSH facilities in providing care to patients with pancreatic adenocarcinoma.

Disparities in early-stage lung cancer outcomes at minority-serving hospitals compared with nonminority serving hospitals

OBJECTIVES

Disparities in cancer care are omnipresent and originate from a multilevel set of barriers. Our objectives were to describe the likelihood of undergoing surgery for early-stage non-small cell lung cancer at minority-serving hospitals (MSHs), and evaluate the association of race/ethnicity with resection based on MSH status.

METHODS

A retrospective study using the National Cancer Database (2008-2016) was conducted including patients with clinical stage I non-small cell lung cancer. MSHs were defined as hospitals in the top decile of providing care to Hispanic or African American patients. The primary outcome evaluated was receipt of definitive surgery at MSHs vs non-MSHs. Outcomes related to race/ethnicity stratified by hospital type were also investigated.

RESULTS

A total of 142,580 patients were identified from 1192 hospitals (120 MSHs and 1072 non-MSHs). Most patients (85% [n = 121,240]) were non-Hispanic White, followed by African American (9% [n = 12,772]), and Hispanic (3%, [n= 3749]). MSHs cared for 7.4% (n = 10,491) of the patients included. In adjusted analyses, patients treated at MSHs were resected less often than those at non-MSHs (odds ratio, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.76-1.00; P = .0495). African American patients were less likely to receive surgery in the overall analysis (P < .01), and at MSHs specifically (P < .01), compared with non-Hispanic White patients. Hispanic patients had similar rates of resection in the overall analysis (P = .11); however, at MSHs, they underwent surgery more often compared with non-Hispanic White patients (P = .02). Resected patients at MSHs had similar overall survival (median, 91.7 months; 95% CI, 86.6-96.8 months) compared with those resected at non-MSHs (median, 85.7 months; 95% CI, 84.5-86.8 months).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with early-stage non-small cell lung cancer underwent resection less often at MSHs compared with non-MSHs. Disparities related to underutilization of surgery for African American patients continue to persist, regardless of hospital type.

Persistent racial disparities in refusal of resection in non-small cell lung cancer patients at high-volume and Black-serving institutions

BACKGROUND

Surgical resection is the standard of care for early-stage non-small cell lung cancer. Black patients have higher surgical refusal rates than White patients. We evaluated factors associated with the refusal of resection and subsequent non-small cell lung cancer outcomes.

METHODS

We identified patients with non-small cell lung cancer stages IA to IIIA eligible for surgical resection (lobectomy or pneumonectomy) listed between 2004 and 2017 in the National Cancer Database. We stratified hospitals by the proportion of Black patients served and lung cancer resection volume. We used multivariable regression models to identify factors associated with refusal of resection and assessed 5-year mortality using Kaplan-Meier analysis and Cox proportional hazard modeling.

RESULTS

Of 221,396 patients identified, 7,753 (3.5%) refused surgery. Black race was associated with increased refusal (adjusted odds ratio 2.06, 95% confidence interval 1.90-2.22). Compared to White race, Black race was associated with increased refusal across the highest (adjusted odds ratio 2.29, 95% confidence interval 1.94-2.54), intermediate (adjusted odds ratio 2.05, 95% confidence interval 1.78-2.37), and lowest (adjusted odds ratio 1.77, 95% confidence interval 1.58-1.99) volume tertiles. Similarly, Black race was associated with increased refusal across the highest (adjusted odds ratio 1.97, 95% confidence interval 1.78-2.17), intermediate (adjusted odds ratio 2.08, 95% confidence interval 1.80-2.40), and lowest (adjusted odds ratio 1.53, 95% confidence interval 1.13-2.06) Black-serving tertiles. However, surgical resection yielded similar 5-year survival for Black and White patients.

CONCLUSION

Racial disparities in non-small cell lung cancer surgery refusal persist regardless of hospital volume or proportion of Black patients served. These findings suggest that a better understanding of patient and patient-provider level interventions could facilitate a better understanding of treatment decision-making.

Disparities in guideline-compliant care for patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma at minority-versus non-minority-serving hospitals

BACKGROUND

We examined disparities in guideline-compliant care at minority-serving hospitals (MSH) versus non-MSH among patients with localized or metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma (PDAC).

METHODS

Patients with PDAC were identified within the National Cancer Database (2004-2018). Guideline-compliant care was defined as surgery + chemotherapy ± radiation therapy for localized and chemotherapy for metastatic disease. Facilities in the top decile of minority patients treated were considered MSH.

RESULTS

A total of 190,950 patients were identified and most (59.6%) had metastatic disease. Overall, 6.4% of patients with localized and 8.2% of patients with metastatic disease were treated at MSH. Patients treated at MSH were less likely to receive guideline-compliant care (localized: OR = 0.78, 95% CI: 0.67-0.91; metastatic: OR = 0.77, 95% CI: 0.67-0.88). Minority patients were less likely to receive guideline-compliant care at non-MSH (localized: OR = 0.71, 95% CI: 0.67-0.75; metastatic: OR = 0.85, 95% CI: 0.82-0.89) or MSH (localized: OR = 0.85, 95% CI: 0.74-0.98; metastatic: OR = 0.91, 95% CI: 0.82-0.99). Patients treated at non-MSH or MSH who received guideline-compliant care were more likely to have higher OS regardless of stage or race.

CONCLUSIONS

MSH patients were less likely to receive guideline-compliant care and minority patients were less likely to receive guideline-compliant care regardless of MSH status. Guideline-compliant care was associated with improved OS.

Differences in the surgical management of early-stage hepatocellular carcinoma at minority versus non-minority-serving hospitals

BACKGROUND

We examined differences in surgical intervention at minority-serving hospitals versus non-minority-serving hospitals among patients with early-stage hepatocellular carcinoma. We also investigated associations between surgical management and overall survival, stratified by minority-serving hospital status.

METHODS

Patients with early-stage hepatocellular carcinoma, defined as cT1, were identified within the National Cancer Database (2004-2018). The primary outcome was surgical intervention (resection, ablation, or transplantation). The proportion of minority (non-Hispanic Black or Hispanic) patients treated at each facility was determined, and hospitals in the top decile were considered minority-serving hospitals.

RESULTS

A total of 46,703 patients with early-stage hepatocellular carcinoma were identified, of whom 4,214 (9.0%) were treated at minority-serving hospitals. Patients treated at minority-serving hospitals were less likely to undergo surgical intervention than patients treated at non-minority-serving hospitals (odds ratio = 0.87, 95% confidence interval: 0.81-0.94). Minority patients treated at non-minority-serving hospitals were less likely to undergo surgical intervention than White patients (odds ratio = 0.86, 95% confidence interval: 0.82-0.90) and had a further associated decrease in the likelihood of surgical intervention when treated at minority-serving hospitals (odds ratio = 0.81, 95% confidence interval: 0.69-0.94). Regardless of minority-serving hospital status, surgery was associated with improved overall survival. There were no clinically meaningful differences in overall survival between White and minority patients who underwent surgery either at minority-serving hospitals or non-minority-serving hospitals.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with early-stage hepatocellular carcinoma had an associated decrease in the likelihood of surgical intervention when treated at minority-serving hospitals. Minority patients treated at minority-serving hospitals had an associated decrease in the likelihood of surgery, but to a lesser extent when treated at non-minority-serving hospitals. Surgery was associated with improved overall survival regardless of minority or minority-serving hospital status.

Association of Minority-Serving Hospital Status with Post-Discharge Care Utilization and Expenditures in Gastrointestinal Cancer

BACKGROUND

Disparities in utilization of post-discharge care and overall expenditures may relate to site of care and race/ethnicity. We sought to define the impact of minority-serving hospitals (MSHs) on postoperative outcomes, discharge disposition, and overall expenditures associated with an episode of surgical care.

METHODS

Patients who underwent resection for esophageal, colon, rectal, pancreatic, and liver cancer were identified from Medicare Standard Analytic Files (2013-2017). A MSH was defined as the top decile of facilities treating minority patients (Black and/or Hispanic). The impact of MSH on outcomes of interest was analyzed using multivariable logistic regression and generalized linear regression models. Textbook outcome (TO) was defined as no postoperative complications, no prolonged length of stay, and no 90-day mortality or readmission.

RESULTS

Among 113,263 patients, only a small subset of patients underwent surgery at MSHs (n = 4404, 3.9%). While 52.3% of patients achieved TO, rates were lower at MSHs (MSH: 47.2% vs. non-MSH: 52.5%; p < 0.001). On multivariable analysis, receiving care at an MSH was associated with not achieving TO (odds ratio [OR] 0.81, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.76-0.87) and concomitantly higher odds of additional post-discharge care (OR 1.10, 95% CI 1.01-1.20). Patients treated at an MSH also had higher median post-discharge expenditures (MSH: $8400, interquartile range [IQR] $2300-$22,100 vs. non-MSH: $7000, IQR $2200-$17,900; p = 0.002). In fact, MSHs remained associated with a 11.05% (9.78-12.33%) increase in index expenditures and a 16.68% (11.44-22.17%) increase in post-discharge expenditures.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients undergoing surgery at a MSH were less likely to achieve a TO. Additionally, MSH status was associated with a higher likelihood of requiring post-discharge care and higher expenditures.

Reporting of Circumferential Resection Margin in Rectal Cancer Surgery

Importance

Circumferential resection margin (CRM) in rectal cancer surgery is a major prognostic indicator associated with local recurrence and overall survival. Facility rates of CRM positivity have recently been established as a new quality measure by the Commission on Cancer (CoC); however, the completeness of CRM status reporting is not well characterized.

Objective

To describe the changes in CRM reporting and factors associated with low rates of reporting.

Design, Setting, and Participants

A retrospective cohort study was conducted using data from the National Cancer Database between January 2010 and December 2019. Data were analyzed between October 1, 2021, and February 1, 2022. Data from the National Cancer Database included patients diagnosed with nonmetastatic rectal adenocarcinoma receiving surgical treatment at CoC-accredited facilities throughout the US.

Exposures

Patient, tumor, and facility-level factors. Facilities were divided by surgical volume, safety-net status, and CoC facility type.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Circumferential resection margin missingness rates.

Results

A total of 110 571 patients (59.3% men) with rectal adenocarcinoma who underwent curative-intent surgery at 1307 CoC-accredited hospitals were included for analysis. Reporting of CRM improved over the study period, with a mean (SE) missing 12.0% (0.32%) decreased from 16.3% (0.36%). Academic facilities had a higher missingness than other facility types (14.3% vs 10.5%-12.7%; P < .001). Mean (SE) rates of missingness were similar between hospitals of varying volume (lowest quartile: 12.2% [0.93%] vs highest quartile: 12.4% [0.53%]; P = .96). Cases in which fewer than 12 lymph nodes were removed had higher rates of missingness (18.1% vs 11.4%; P < .001). Increased odds of CRM missingness were noted with T category (odds ratio [OR], 1.50; 95% CI, 1.35-1.65) and N category (OR, 2.00; 95% CI, 1.82-2.20). Black race was associated with missingness (OR, 1.13; 95% CI, 1.06-1.14).

Conclusion and Relevance

Although CRM positivity reporting has improved over the last decade, the findings of this study suggest there is substantial room for improvement as it becomes a quality standard. Missingness appears to be associated with poor performance on other quality metrics and facility type. This measure appears to be ideal for targeted institution-level feedback to improve quality of care nationally.

Disparities in NCCN Guideline-Compliant Care for Patients with Early-Stage Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma at Minority-Serving versus Non-Minority-Serving Hospitals

BACKGROUND

Racial/ethnic disparities in pancreatic adenocarcinoma (PDAC) outcomes may relate to receipt of National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guideline-compliant care. We assessed the association between treatment at minority-serving hospitals (MSH) and receipt of NCCN-compliant care.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients who underwent resection of early-stage PDAC between 2006 and 2019 were identified from the National Cancer Database (NCDB). MSH was defined as the top decile of facilities treating minority ethnicities (Black and/or Hispanic). Factors associated with receipt of NCCN-compliant care and its impact on overall survival (OS) were assessed.

RESULTS

Among 44,873 patients who underwent resection of PDAC, most were treated at non-MSH (n = 42,571, 94.9%), while a smaller subset were treated at MSH (n = 2302, 5.1%). Patients treated at MSH were more likely to be at a younger median age (MSH 66 years versus non-MSH 67 years), Black or Hispanic (MSH 58.4% versus non-MSH 12.0%), and not insured (MSH 7.8% versus non-MSH 1.6%). While 71.7% (n = 31,182) of patients were compliant with NCCN care, guideline-compliant care was lower at MSH (MSH 62.5% versus non-MSH 72.2%). On multivariable analysis, receiving care at MSH was associated with not receiving guideline-compliant care [odds ratio (OR) 0.63, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.53-0.74]. At non-MSH, non-white patients had lower odds of receiving guideline-compliant PDCA care (OR 0.85, 95% CI 0.78-0.91). Failure to comply was associated with worse overall survival (OS) [hazard ratio (HR) 1.50, 95% CI 1.46-1.54, all p < 0.001].

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with PDAC treated at MSH and minorities treated at non-MSH were less likely to receive NCCN-compliant care. Failure to comply with guideline-based PDAC treatment was associated with worse OS.

The Association of Guideline-Concordant Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy for Melanoma at Minority-Serving Hospitals

BACKGROUND

Minority-serving hospitals (MSHs) have been associated with lower guideline adherence and worse outcomes for various cancers. However, the relationship among MSH status, concordance with sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) guidelines, and overall survival (OS) for patients with cutaneous melanoma is not well studied.

METHODS

The National Cancer Database was queried for patients diagnosed with T1a*, T2, and T3 melanoma between 2012 and 2017. MSHs were defined as the top decile of institutions ranked by the proportion of minorities treated for melanoma. Based on National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines, guideline-concordant care (GCC) was defined as not undergoing SLNB if thickness was < 0.76 mm without ulceration, mitosis ≥ 1/mm², or lymphovascular invasion (T1a*), and performing SLNB for patients with intermediate thickness melanomas between 1.0 and 4.0 mm (T2/T3). Multivariable logistic regressions examined associations with GCC. The Kaplan-Meier method and log-rank tests were used to evaluate OS between MSH and non-MSH facilities.

RESULTS

Overall, 5.9% (N = 2182/36,934) of the overall cohort and 37.8% of minorities (n = 199/527) were managed at MSHs. GCC rates were 89.5% (n = 33,065/36,934) in the overall cohort and 85.4% (n = 450/527) in the minority subgroup. Patients in the overall cohort (odds ratio [OR] 0.85; p = 0.02) and the minority subgroup (OR 0.55; p = 0.02) were less likely to obtain GCC if they received their care at MSHs compared with non-MSHs. Minority patients receiving care at MSHs had a decreased survival compared with those treated at non-MSHs (p = 0.002).

CONCLUSIONS

Adherence to SLNB guidelines for melanoma was lower at MSHs. Continued focus is needed on equity in melanoma care for minority patients in the United States.

Access to definitive treatment and survival for intermediate-risk and high-risk prostate cancer at hospital systems serving health disparity populations

INTRODUCTION

Although socioeconomic and racial disparities in prostate cancer (CaP) have been attributed to patient-level and physician-level factors, there is growing interest in investigating the role of the facility of care in driving cancer disparities. We sought to examine the receipt of guideline-concordant definitive treatment, time to treatment initiation (TTI), and overall survival (OS) for men with CaP receiving care at hospital systems serving health disparity populations (HSDPs).

METHODS

We retrospective analyzed the National Cancer Database (2004-2016). We identified men with intermediate-risk or high-risk CaP eligible for definitive treatment. The primary outcomes were receipt of definitive treatment and TTI within 90 days of diagnosis. The secondary outcome was OS. We defined HSDPs as minority-serving hospitals-facilities in the highest decile of proportion of non-Hispanic Black (NHB) or Hispanic cancer patients-and/or high-burden safety-net hospitals-facilities in the highest quartile of proportion of underinsured patients. We used mixed-effect models with facility-level random intercept to compare outcomes between HSDPs and non-HSDPs among the entire cohort and among men who received definitive treatment.

RESULTS

We included 968 non-HSDPs (72.2%) and 373 HSDPs (27.8%) facilities. Treatment at HSDPs was associated with lower adjusted odds of receipt of definitive treatment (aOR 0.64; 95% CI 0.57-0.71; P < 0.001), lower odds of TTI within 90 days of diagnosis (aOR 0.74; 95% CI 0.68-0.79; P < 0.001), and worse OS (aHR 1.05; 95% CI 1.02-1.09; P = .003) when accounting for covariates. However, no difference was found in OS if patients received definitive treatment (aHR 1.03; 95% CI 0.99-1.07; P = 0.1). NHB men at HSDPs had worse outcomes than NHB men treated at non-HSDPs as well as NHW men treated at HSDPs.

CONCLUSION

Patients treated at HSDPs were less likely to receive timely definitive treatment and had worse OS, independent of their race. NHB men have worse outcomes than NHW at HSDPs. Thus, NHB men with CaP are doubly disadvantaged since they are more likely to be treated at hospitals with worse outcomes and have worse outcomes than other patients at those same institutions.

Association of hospital-level factors with utilization of sentinel lymph node biopsy in patients with early-stage vulvar cancer

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate utilization of sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) for early-stage vulvar cancer at minority-serving hospitals and low-volume facilities.

METHODS

Between 2012-2018, individuals with T1b vulvar squamous cell carcinoma were identified using the National Cancer Database. Patient, facility, and disease characteristics were compared between patients undergoing SLNB or inguinofemoral lymph node dissection (IFLD). Multivariable logistic regression, adjusted for patient, facility, and disease characteristics, was used to evaluate factors associated with SLNB. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis using log rank test and Cox regression was performed.

RESULTS

Of the 3,532 patients, 2,406 (68.1%) underwent lymph node evaluation, with 1,704 (48.2%) undergoing IFLD and 702 (19.8%) SLNB. In a multivariable analysis, treatment at minority-serving hospitals (OR 0.39, 95% CI 0.19-0.78) and low-volume hospitals (OR 0.44, 95% CI 0.28-0.70) were associated with significantly lower odds of undergoing SLNB compared to receiving care at non-minority-serving and high-volume hospitals, respectively. While SLNB utilization increased over time for the entire cohort and stratified subgroups, use of the procedure did not increase at minority-serving hospitals. After controlling for patient and tumor characteristics, SLNB was not associated with worse OS compared to IFLD in patients with positive (HR 1.02, 95% CI 0.63-1.66) or negative (HR 0.92, 95% CI 0.70-1.21) nodal pathology.

CONCLUSIONS

For patients with early-stage vulvar cancer, treatment at minority-serving or low-volume hospitals was associated with significantly decreased odds of undergoing SLNB. Future efforts should be concentrated toward ensuring that all patients have access to advanced surgical techniques regardless of where they receive their care.

Guideline-Discordant Care in Early-Stage Vulvar Cancer

OBJECTIVE

To describe the use of National Comprehensive Cancer Network guideline-concordant inguinofemoral lymph node (LN) evaluation in individuals with early-stage vulvar cancer.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study identified patients with T1b and T2 vulvar squamous cell carcinoma diagnosed between 2012 and 2018 using the National Cancer Database. Factors associated with LN evaluation were examined using logistic regression analyses, adjusting for patient, disease, and facility-level characteristics. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis using log rank test and Cox regression was performed for the entire cohort and a subgroup of older patients , defined as individuals aged 80 years or older.

RESULTS

Of the 5,685 patients with vulvar cancer, 3,756 (66.1%) underwent guideline-concordant LN evaluation. In our adjusted model, age 80 years or older (odds ratio [OR], 0.30; 95% CI 0.22-0.42) and Black race (OR 0.72; 95% CI 0.54-0.95) were associated with lower odds of LN evaluation. High-volume hospitals were associated with increased odds of LN evaluation compared with low-volume hospitals (OR 1.62; 95% CI 1.28-2.05). Older individuals who did not undergo LN evaluation had significantly worse overall survival than those with pathologically negative LNs (hazard ratio [HR] 0.45; 95% CI 0.37-0.55) and similar overall survival as those with pathologically positive LNs (HR 1.05; 95% CI 0.77-1.43).

CONCLUSION

Guideline-concordant LN evaluation for early-stage vulvar squamous cell carcinoma is low. Lower utilization is associated with older age, Black race, and care at a low-volume hospital.

Current trends in nonoperative management for rectal adenocarcinoma: An unequal playing field?

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Increasing evidence suggests patient-oriented benefits of nonoperative management (NOM) for rectal cancer. However, vigilant surveillance requires excellent access to care. We sought to examine patient, socioeconomic, and facility-level factors associated with NOM over time.

METHODS

Using the National Cancer Database (2006-2017), we examined patients with Stage II-III rectal adenocarcinoma, who received neoadjuvant chemoradiation and received NOM versus surgery. Factors associated with NOM were assessed using multivariable logistic regression with backward stepwise selection.

RESULTS

There were 59,196 surgical and 8520 NOM patients identified. NOM use increased from 12.9% to 15.9% between 2006 and 2017. Patients who were Black (adjusted odds ratio [aOR]: 1.36, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.26-1.47), treated at community cancer centers (aOR: 1.22, 95% CI: 1.12-1.30), without insurance (aOR: 1.87, 95% CI: 1.68-2.09), and with less education (aOR: 1.53, 95% CI: 1.42-1.65) exhibited higher odds of NOM. Patients treated at high-volume centers (aOR: 0.79, 95% CI: 0.74-0.84) and those who traveled >25.6 miles for care (aOR: 0.59, 95% CI: 0.55-0.64) had lower odds of NOM.

CONCLUSIONS

Vulnerable groups who traditionally have difficulty accessing comprehensive cancer care were more likely to receive NOM, suggesting that healthcare disparities may be driving utilization. More research is needed to understand NOM decision-making in rectal cancer treatment.

Modifiers of and Disparities in Palliative and Supportive Care Timing and Utilization among Neurosurgical Patients with Malignant Central Nervous System Tumors

Patients with primary or secondary central nervous system (CNS) malignancies benefit from utilization of palliative care (PC) in addition to other supportive services, such as home health and social work. Guidelines propose early initiation of PC for patients with advanced cancers. We analyzed a cohort of privately insured patients with malignant brain or spinal tumors derived from the Optum Clinformatics Datamart Database to investigate health disparities in access to and utilization of supportive services. We introduce a novel construct, "provider patient racial diversity index" (provider pRDI), which is a measure of the proportion of non-white minority patients a provider encounters to approximate a provider's patient demographics and suggest a provider's cultural sensitivity and exposure to diversity. Our analysis demonstrates low rates of PC, home health, and social work services among racial minority patients. Notably, Hispanic patients had low likelihood of engaging with all three categories of supportive services. However, patients who saw providers categorized into high provider pRDI (categories II and III) were increasingly more likely to interface with supportive care services and at an earlier point in their disease courses. This study suggests that prospective studies that examine potential interventions at the provider level, including diversity training, are needed.

Healthcare Disparities and Colorectal Cancer

Health care disparities are defined as health differences between groups that are avoidable, unnecessary, and unjust. Racial disparities in colorectal cancer mortality, particularly for Black patients, are well-described. Disparities in preventative measures, early detection, effective treatment, and posttreatment services contribute to these differences. Underlying these issues are patient, provider, health care system, and policy-level factors that lead to these disparities. Multilevel interventions designed to address each level of care can provide an effective means to mitigate these disparities.

Impact of Race and Insurance Status on Primary Treatment for HPV-Associated Oropharyngeal Squamous Cell Carcinoma

OBJECTIVE

To assess the impact of sociodemographic factors on primary treatment choice (surgery vs radiotherapy) in patients with human papillomavirus-associated (HPV+) oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma (OPSCC).

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective analysis of the National Cancer Database.

SETTING

Data from >1500 Commission on Cancer institutions (academic and community) via the National Cancer Database.

METHODS

Our sample consists of patients diagnosed with HPV+ OPSCC from 2010 to 2015. The primary outcome of interest was initial treatment modality: surgery vs radiation. We performed multivariable logistic models to assess the relationship between treatment choice and sociodemographic factors, including sex, race, treatment facility, and insurance status.

RESULTS

Of the 16,043 patients identified, 5894 (36.7%) underwent primary surgery while 10,149 (63.3%) received primary radiotherapy. Black patients were less likely than White patients to receive primary surgery (odds ratio [OR], 0.80; 95% CI, 0.66-0.96). When compared with privately insured patients, those who were uninsured or on Medicaid or Medicare were also less likely to receive primary surgery (OR, 0.70 [95% CI, 0.56-0.86]; OR, 0.77 [95% CI, 0.65-0.91]; OR, 0.85 [95% CI, 0.75-0.96], respectively). Patients receiving treatment at an academic/research cancer program were more likely to undergo primary surgery than those treated at comprehensive community cancer programs (OR, 1.33; 95% CI, 1.14-1.56).

CONCLUSION

In this large sample of patients with HPV+ OPSCC, race and insurance status affect primary treatment choice. Specifically, Black and nonprivately insured patients are less likely to receive primary surgery as compared with White or privately insured patients. Our findings illuminate potential disparities in HPV+ OPSCC treatment.

Disparities in NCCN Guideline Compliant Care for Resectable Cholangiocarcinoma at Minority-Serving Versus Non-Minority-Serving Hospitals

BACKGROUND

Racial/ethnic disparities in cancer outcomes may relate to variations in receipt of National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guideline compliant care.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients undergoing resection of cholangiocarcinoma (CCA) between 2004 and 2015 were identified using the National Cancer Database (NCDB). Institutions treating Black and Hispanic patients within the top decile were categorized as minority-serving hospitals (MSH). Factors associated with receipt of NCCN-compliant care, and the impact of NCCN compliance on overall survival (OS), were evaluated.

RESULTS

Among 16,108 patients who underwent resection of CCA, the majority of patients were treated at non-MSH (n = 14,779, 91.8%), while a smaller subset underwent resection of CCA at MSH (n = 1329, 8.2%). Patients treated at MSH facilities tended to be younger (MSH: 65 years versus non-MSH: 67 years), Black or Hispanic (MSH: 59.9% versus non-MSH: 13.4%), and uninsured (MSH: 11.6% versus non-MSH: 2.2%). While overall compliance with NCCN care was 73.0% (n = 11,762), guideline-compliant care was less common at MSH (MSH: 68.8% versus non-MSH: 73.4%; p < 0.001). On multivariable analyses, the odds of receiving non-NCCN compliant care remained lower at MSH (OR 0.76, 95% CI 0.65-0.88). While white patients had similar odds of NCCN-compliant care with minority patients when treated at MSH (OR 0.98, 95% CI 0.75-1.28), minority patients had lower odds of receiving guideline-compliant care when treated at non-MSH (OR 0.85, 95% CI 0.75-0.96). Failure to comply with NCCN guidelines was associated with worse long-term outcomes (HR 1.60, 95% CI 1.52-1.69).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients treated at MSH had decreased odds to receive NCCN-compliant care following resection of CCA. Failure to comply with guideline-based cancer care was associated with worse long-term outcomes.

Patients with ineffective esophageal motility benefit from laparoscopic antireflux surgery

BACKGROUND

Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is a common chronic disorder of the gastrointestinal tract, affecting more than 50% of Americans. The development of GERD may be associated with ineffective esophageal motility (IEM). The impact of esophageal motility on outcomes post laparoscopic antireflux surgery (LARS), including quality of life (QOL), remains to be defined. The purpose of this study is to analyze and compare QOL outcomes following LARS among patients with and without ineffective esophageal motility (IEM).

METHODS

This is a single-institution, retrospective review of a prospectively maintained database of patients who underwent LARS, from January 2012 to July 2019, for treatment of GERD at our institution. Patients undergoing revisional surgery were excluded. Patients with normal peristalsis (non-IEM) were distinguished from those with IEM, defined using the Chicago classification, on manometric studies. Four validated QOL surveys were used to assess outcomes: Reflux Symptom Index (RSI), Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease Health-Related QOL (GERD-HRQL), Laryngopharyngeal Reflux Health-Related QOL (LPR-HRQL), and Swallowing Disorders (SWAL) survey.

RESULTS

203 patients with complete manometric data were identified (75.4% female) and divided into two groups, IEM (n = 44) and non-IEM (n = 159). IEM and Non-IEM groups were parallel in age (58.1 ± 15.3 vs. 62.2 ± 12 years, p = 0.062), body mass index (27.4 ± 4.1 vs. 28.2 ± 4.9 kg/m², p = 0.288), distribution of comorbid disease, sex, and ASA scores. The groups differed in manometry findings and Johnson-DeMeester score (IEM: 38.6 vs. Non-IEM: 24.0, p = 0.023). Patients in both groups underwent similar rates of Nissen fundoplication (IEM: 84.1% vs. Non-IEM: 93.7%, p = 0.061) with greater improvements in dysphagia (IEM: 27.4% vs. 44.2%) in Non-IEM group but comparable benefit in reflux reduction (IEM: 80.6% vs. 72.4%) in both groups at follow-up. There were no differences in postoperative outcomes. Satisfaction rates with LARS were similar between groups (IEM: 80% vs. non-IEM: 77.9%, p > 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Patients with ineffective esophageal motility derive significant benefits in perioperative and QOL outcomes after LARS. Nevertheless, as anticipated, their baseline dysmotility may reduce the degree of improvement in dysphagia rates post-surgery compared to patients with normal motility. Furthermore, the presence of preoperative IEM should not be a contraindication for complete fundoplication. Key to optimal outcomes after LARS is careful patient selection based on objective perioperative data, including manometry evaluation, with the purpose of tailoring surgery to provide effective reflux control and improved esophageal clearance.