Geographic Variation and Sociodemographic Disparity in the Use of Oxaliplatin-Containing Chemotherapy in Patients With Stage III Colon Cancer
Division of Management, Policy, and Community Health, The University of Texas School of Public Health, Houston, TX. Electronic address: .Clinical Colorectal Cancer (Impact Factor: 2.81). 11/2012; 12(2). DOI: 10.1016/j.clcc.2012.09.007
BACKGROUND: According to the National Cancer Comprehensive Network (NCCN), oxaliplatin with 5-fluorouracil and leucovorin (5-FU/LV) is the recommended adjuvant chemotherapy for patients with resected stage III colon cancer. Age and race are considered strong predictors of chemotherapy receipt, whereas geographic disparity has received minimal attention. The purpose of this study was to examine geographic variation and sociodemographic disparity in the use of chemotherapy in patients with stage III colon cancer, focusing specifically on oxaliplatin. METHODS: A retrospective cohort of 4106 Medicare patients was identified from the Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results (SEER)/Medicare linked database. Descriptive statistics show how oxaliplatin-containing chemotherapy was used in various geographic regions among different age and racial groups. Multiple logistic regression analysis was performed to examine the relationship between receipt of oxaliplatin-containing chemotherapy and geographic region while adjusting for other sociodemographic and tumor characteristics. RESULTS: Only 49% of the patients with stage III disease received adjuvant chemotherapy within 3 to 6 months of colon cancer-specific surgery. Patients aged 66 to 70 years were 78% more likely to receive chemotherapy than were those aged 80 years and older (P < .001). Patients in less urban regions were approximately 42% less likely to receive oxaliplatin chemotherapy than those residing in a big metro region (odds ratio [OR], 0.58; P = .008). CONCLUSION: Chemotherapy use varies across geographic regions, especially for new chemotherapy drugs like oxaliplatin. Further research is needed to identify the causes of this geographic disparity and ways to provide high-quality cancer care to all patients according to their preferences and needs.
- [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Background: Racial disparities in colorectal cancer persist. Late stage at presentation and lack of stage-specific treatment may be contributing factors. We sought to evaluate the magnitude of disparity remaining after accounting for gender, stage, and treatment using predicted survival models. Methods: We used institutional tumor registries from a public health system (two hospitals) and a not-for-profit health system (nine hospitals) from 1995 to 2011. Demographics, stage at diagnosis, treatment, and survival were recorded. Hazard ratios (HRs) and predicted HRs were determined by Cox regression and postestimation analyses. Results: There were 6,990 patients: 55.7 % white, 23.6 % African American, 15.1 % Hispanic, and 5.6 % Asian/other. Predictors of survival were surgery (HR 0.57, 95 % confidence interval [CI] 0.46-0.70), chemotherapy (HR 0.7, 95 % CI 0.62-0.79), female gender (HR 0.87, 95 % CI 0.83-0.90), age (HR 1.04, 95 % CI 1.03-1.05), and African American race (HR 3.6, 95 % CI 1.5-8.4). Balancing for stage, gender, and treatment reduced the predicted HRs for African Americans by 28 % and Hispanics by 17 %. In this model, African American and Hispanics still had the worst predicted HRs at younger ages, but whites had the worst predicted HR after age 75. Conclusions: Gender, stage, and treatment partially accounted for worsened survival in African Americans and Hispanics at all ages. At younger ages, race-related disparities remained which may reflect tumor biology or other unknown factors. Once gender, stage, and treatment are balanced at older ages, the increased mortality observed in whites may be due to factors such as comorbidities. Further system- and patient-level study is needed to investigate reasons for colorectal cancer survival disparities.Annals of Surgical Oncology 06/2013; 20(11). DOI:10.1245/s10434-013-3045-z · 3.93 Impact Factor
- [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Advances in multimodality therapy have led to increased survival for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer, but the impact on patients undergoing resection for colorectal liver metastases is unclear. The purpose of this study was to evaluate patterns of treatment for resectable colorectal liver metastases in the USA over the last two decades. Using the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results-Medicare database, 1,926 patients who underwent hepatic resection for colorectal liver metastasis between 1991 and 2007 were included and divided into two cohorts: period 1 (1991-2000) and period 2 (2001-2007). Demographic data, treatment patterns, and outcomes of the two periods were compared by univariate methods. Multivariable regression models were constructed to predict the use of perioperative chemotherapy, postoperative complications, and 90-day mortality following liver resection. The overall use of perioperative chemotherapy was 33 % and did not differ between periods, but shifted from postoperative to preoperative over time. By multivariable analysis, older age, black race, stage III primary cancer, and metachronous disease were predictive of lesser likelihood of chemotherapy use. The use of preoperative chemotherapy was not associated with any increase in perioperative morbidity or mortality. Despite increased survival and widespread recommendations for the use of multimodality therapy, the overall resection rate and use of perioperative chemotherapy for resectable colorectal liver metastases remain underutilized and have not increased over time. Efforts to investigate barriers to the widespread use of multimodality therapy for these patients are warranted.Journal of Gastrointestinal Surgery 09/2013; 17(11). DOI:10.1007/s11605-013-2325-z · 2.80 Impact Factor
- Acta oncologica (Stockholm, Sweden) 01/2014; 53(7). DOI:10.3109/0284186X.2013.878470 · 3.00 Impact Factor
Data provided are for informational purposes only. Although carefully collected, accuracy cannot be guaranteed. The impact factor represents a rough estimation of the journal's impact factor and does not reflect the actual current impact factor. Publisher conditions are provided by RoMEO. Differing provisions from the publisher's actual policy or licence agreement may be applicable.