Literature DB >> 25203879

Failure of evidence-based cancer care in the United States: the association between rectal cancer treatment, cancer center volume, and geography.

John R T Monson1, Christian P Probst, Steven D Wexner, Feza H Remzi, James W Fleshman, Julio Garcia-Aguilar, George J Chang, David W Dietz.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: This study examines recent adherence to recommended neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy guidelines for patients with rectal cancer across geographic regions and institution volume and assesses trends over time.
BACKGROUND: A recent report by the Institute of Medicine described US cancer care as chaotic. Cited deficiencies included wide variation in adherence to evidence-based guidelines even where clear consensus exists.
METHODS: Patients operated on for clinical stage II and III rectal cancer were selected from the 2006-2011 National Cancer Data Base. Multivariable logistic regressions were used to assess variation in chemotherapy and radiation use by cancer center type, geographical location, and hospital volume. The analysis controlled for patient age at diagnosis, sex, race/ethnicity, primary payer, average household income, average education, urban/rural classification of patient residence, comorbidity, and oncologic stage.
RESULTS: There were 30,994 patients who met the inclusion criteria. Use of neoadjuvant radiation therapy and chemotherapy varied significantly by type of cancer center. The highest rates of adherence were observed in high-volume centers compared with low-volume centers (78% vs 69%; adjusted odds ratio = 1.46; P < 0.001). This variation is mirrored by hospital geographic location. Primary payer and year of diagnosis were not predictive of rates of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy.
CONCLUSIONS: Adherence to evidence-based treatment guidelines in rectal cancer is suboptimal in the United States, with significant differences based on hospital volume and geographic regions. Little improvement has occurred in the last 5 years. These results support the implementation of standardized care pathways and a Centers of Excellence program for US patients with rectal cancer.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 25203879     DOI: 10.1097/SLA.0000000000000928

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ann Surg        ISSN: 0003-4932            Impact factor:   12.969


  30 in total

1.  Utilization of apical vaginal support procedures at time of inpatient hysterectomy performed for benign conditions: a national estimate.

Authors:  Whitney Trotter Ross; Melanie R Meister; Jonathan P Shepherd; Margaret A Olsen; Jerry L Lowder
Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2017-07-14       Impact factor: 8.661

2.  Presence of a fellowship improves perioperative outcomes following hepatopancreatobiliary procedures.

Authors:  Maria S Altieri; Jie Yang; Donglei Yin; Catherine Frenkel; Mark Talamini; Dana A Telem; Aurora Pryor
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2016-11-04       Impact factor: 4.584

3.  Cancer Center Volume and Type Impact Stage-Specific Utilization of Neoadjuvant Therapy in Rectal Cancer.

Authors:  Emily F Midura; Andrew D Jung; Meghan C Daly; Dennis J Hanseman; Bradley R Davis; Shimul A Shah; Ian M Paquette
Journal:  Dig Dis Sci       Date:  2017-05-13       Impact factor: 3.199

4.  Adoption of Gene Expression Profiling for Breast Cancer in US Oncology Practice for Women Younger Than 65 Years.

Authors:  Suzanne C O'Neill; Claudine Isaacs; Calvin Chao; Huei-Ting Tsai; Chunfu Liu; Bola F Ekezue; Nandini Selvam; Larry G Kessler; Marc D Schwartz; Tania Lobo; Arnold L Potosky
Journal:  J Natl Compr Canc Netw       Date:  2015-10       Impact factor: 11.908

5.  High Rate of Positive Circumferential Resection Margins Following Rectal Cancer Surgery: A Call to Action.

Authors:  Aaron S Rickles; David W Dietz; George J Chang; Steven D Wexner; Mariana E Berho; Feza H Remzi; Frederick L Greene; James W Fleshman; Maher A Abbas; Walter Peters; Katia Noyes; John R T Monson; Fergal J Fleming
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  2015-12       Impact factor: 12.969

6.  Predicting opportunities to increase utilization of laparoscopy for rectal cancer.

Authors:  Deborah S Keller; Jiejing Qiu; Anthony J Senagore
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2017-09-15       Impact factor: 4.584

7.  Accreditation Readiness in US Multidisciplinary Rectal Cancer Care: A Survey of OSTRICH Member Institutions.

Authors:  Lawrence Lee; David W Dietz; Fergal J Fleming; Feza H Remzi; Steven D Wexner; David Winchester; John R T Monson
Journal:  JAMA Surg       Date:  2018-04-01       Impact factor: 14.766

8.  Characteristics and survival outcomes associated with the lack of radiation in the treatment of glioblastoma.

Authors:  Bin Huang; Therese A Dolecek; Quan Chen; Catherine R Garcia; Thomas Pittman; John L Villano
Journal:  Med Oncol       Date:  2018-04-17       Impact factor: 3.064

9.  Surgeon-Level Variation in Utilization of Local Staging and Neoadjuvant Therapy for Stage II-III Rectal Adenocarcinoma.

Authors:  Douglas S Swords; David E Skarda; William T Sause; Ute Gawlick; George M Cannon; Mark A Lewis; Courtney L Scaife; Jesse A Gygi; H Tae Kim
Journal:  J Gastrointest Surg       Date:  2019-01-31       Impact factor: 3.452

10.  Hospital Characteristics Associated with Stage II/III Rectal Cancer Guideline Concordant Care: Analysis of Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results-Medicare Data.

Authors:  Mary E Charlton; Jennifer E Hrabe; Kara B Wright; Jennifer A Schlichting; Bradley D McDowell; Thorvardur R Halfdanarson; Chi Lin; Karyn B Stitzenberg; John W Cromwell
Journal:  J Gastrointest Surg       Date:  2015-12-09       Impact factor: 3.452

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.