BACKGROUND: Among older women with early-stage breast cancer, patients with a short life expectancy (LE) are much less likely to benefit from adjuvant radiation therapy (RT). Little is known about the impact of physicians and regional factors on the use of RT across LE groups. OBJECTIVE: To determine the relative contribution of patient, physician, and regional factors on the use of RT. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort. SUBJECTS: Women aged 67-94 years diagnosed with stage I breast cancer between 1998 and 2007 receiving breast-conserving surgery. MEASURES: We evaluated patient, physician, and regional factors for their association with RT across strata of LE using a 3-level hierarchical logistic regression model. Risk-standardized treatment rates (RSTRs) for the receipt of radiation were calculated according to primary surgeon and region. RESULTS: Approximately 43.6% of the 2253 women with a short LE received RT, compared with 90.8% of the 11,027 women with a long LE. Among women with a short LE, the probability of receiving RT varied substantially across primary surgeons; RSTRs ranged from 27.7% to 67.3% (mean, 43.9%). There was less variability across geographic regions; RSTRs ranged from 42.0% to 45.2% (mean, 43.6%). Short LE patients were more likely to receive RT in areas with high radiation oncologist density (odds ratio, 1.59; 95% confidence interval, 1.07-2.36). CONCLUSIONS: Although there is a wide variation across geographic regions in the use of RT among women with breast cancer and short LE, the regional variation was substantially diminished after accounting for the operating surgeon.
BACKGROUND: Among older women with early-stage breast cancer, patients with a short life expectancy (LE) are much less likely to benefit from adjuvant radiation therapy (RT). Little is known about the impact of physicians and regional factors on the use of RT across LE groups. OBJECTIVE: To determine the relative contribution of patient, physician, and regional factors on the use of RT. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort. SUBJECTS:Women aged 67-94 years diagnosed with stage I breast cancer between 1998 and 2007 receiving breast-conserving surgery. MEASURES: We evaluated patient, physician, and regional factors for their association with RT across strata of LE using a 3-level hierarchical logistic regression model. Risk-standardized treatment rates (RSTRs) for the receipt of radiation were calculated according to primary surgeon and region. RESULTS: Approximately 43.6% of the 2253 women with a short LE received RT, compared with 90.8% of the 11,027 women with a long LE. Among women with a short LE, the probability of receiving RT varied substantially across primary surgeons; RSTRs ranged from 27.7% to 67.3% (mean, 43.9%). There was less variability across geographic regions; RSTRs ranged from 42.0% to 45.2% (mean, 43.6%). Short LE patients were more likely to receive RT in areas with high radiation oncologist density (odds ratio, 1.59; 95% confidence interval, 1.07-2.36). CONCLUSIONS: Although there is a wide variation across geographic regions in the use of RT among women with breast cancer and short LE, the regional variation was substantially diminished after accounting for the operating surgeon.
Authors: M Clarke; R Collins; S Darby; C Davies; P Elphinstone; V Evans; J Godwin; R Gray; C Hicks; S James; E MacKinnon; P McGale; T McHugh; R Peto; C Taylor; Y Wang Journal: Lancet Date: 2005-12-17 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Elliott S Fisher; David E Wennberg; Thérèse A Stukel; Daniel J Gottlieb; F L Lucas; Etoile L Pinder Journal: Ann Intern Med Date: 2003-02-18 Impact factor: 25.391
Authors: Benjamin D Smith; Cary P Gross; Grace L Smith; Deron H Galusha; Justin E Bekelman; Bruce G Haffty Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2006-05-17 Impact factor: 13.506
Authors: Steven J Katz; Sarah T Hawley; Paul Abrahamse; Monica Morrow; Christopher R Friese; Amy K Alderman; Jennifer J Griggs; Ann S Hamilton; John J Graff; Timothy P Hofer Journal: Med Care Date: 2010-10 Impact factor: 2.983
Authors: Joseph S Ross; Vivian Ho; Yongfei Wang; Stephen S Cha; Andrew J Epstein; Frederick A Masoudi; Brahmajee K Nallamothu; Harlan M Krumholz Journal: Circulation Date: 2007-02-05 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Oyewale O Shiyanbola; Brian L Sprague; John M Hampton; Kim Dittus; Ted A James; Sally Herschorn; Ronald E Gangnon; Donald L Weaver; Amy Trentham-Dietz Journal: Cancer Date: 2016-05-31 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Anna D Sinaiko; Alyna T Chien; Michael J Hassett; Pragya Kakani; Danielle Rodin; David J Meyers; Belen Fraile; Meredith B Rosenthal; Mary Beth Landrum Journal: Health Serv Res Date: 2018-10-14 Impact factor: 3.402
Authors: Nina P Tamirisa; Kristin M Sheffield; Abhishek D Parmar; Christopher J Zimmermann; Deepak Adhikari; Gabriela M Vargas; Yong-Fang Kuo; James S Goodwin; Taylor S Riall Journal: Ann Surg Date: 2015-07 Impact factor: 12.969
Authors: Tracy M Layne; Jenerius A Aminawung; Pamela R Soulos; Marcella Nunez-Smith; Maxine A Nunez; Beth A Jones; Karen H Wang; Cary P Gross Journal: Health Aff (Millwood) Date: 2018-03 Impact factor: 6.301
Authors: Sara Tannenbaum; Pamela R Soulos; Jeph Herrin; Sarah Mougalian; Jessica B Long; Rong Wang; Xiaomei Ma; Cary P Gross; Xiao Xu Journal: Med Care Date: 2017-12 Impact factor: 2.983
Authors: Xiao Xu; Jeph Herrin; Pamela R Soulos; Avantika Saraf; Kenneth B Roberts; Brigid K Killelea; Shi-Yi Wang; Jessica B Long; Rong Wang; Xiaomei Ma; Cary P Gross Journal: Health Serv Res Date: 2015-06-29 Impact factor: 3.402
Authors: Chun Chieh Lin; Suanna S Bruinooge; M Kelsey Kirkwood; Dawn L Hershman; Ahmedin Jemal; B Ashleigh Guadagnolo; James B Yu; Shane Hopkins; Michael Goldstein; Dean Bajorin; Sharon H Giordano; Michael Kosty; Anna Arnone; Amy Hanley; Stephanie Stevens; Christine Olsen Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2015-12-17 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Allison Lipitz-Snyderman; Camelia S Sima; Coral L Atoria; Elena B Elkin; Christopher Anderson; Victoria Blinder; Chiaojung Jillian Tsai; Katherine S Panageas; Peter B Bach Journal: JAMA Intern Med Date: 2016-10-01 Impact factor: 21.873