Thomas Churilla1, Brian Egleston2, Yanqun Dong3, Talha Shaikh3, Colin Murphy3, Gina Mantia-Smaldone4, Christina Chu4, Stephen Rubin4, Penny Anderson3. 1. Departments of Radiation Oncology, Fox Chase Cancer Center, Philadelphia, PA 19111, United States. Electronic address: Thomas.Churilla@fccc.edu. 2. Biostatistics and Bioinformatics Facility, Fox Chase Cancer Center, Philadelphia, PA 19111, United States. 3. Departments of Radiation Oncology, Fox Chase Cancer Center, Philadelphia, PA 19111, United States. 4. Surgical Oncology, Fox Chase Cancer Center, Philadelphia, PA 19111, United States.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Our study sought to characterize the presentation, local management and outcomes of invasive cervical cancer with regard to patient insurance status. METHODS: We queried the NCI-SEER database for invasive cervical cancer cases in patients aged 18-64 from 2007 to 2011. We analyzed clinical and socioeconomic data with regard insurance status (insured, Medicaid, or uninsured). We tested for associations between patient insurance status and treatment with definitive surgery for FIGO IA2-IB1 patients, and treatment with suboptimal radiation therapy (RT) for FIGO IB2-IVA patients (other than combination external beam and brachytherapy). We evaluated overall and cause specific survival according to insurance status. RESULTS: 11,714 cases were analyzed: 60% insured, 31% Medicaid, and 9% uninsured. FIGO III/IV stage at presentation was more frequent with Medicaid (40%) and uninsured (42%) compared to insured patients (28%) (p<0.001). For FIGO IA2-IB1 patients, receipt of definitive surgery was inversely associated with uninsured status (OR [95%CI]=0.65 [0.47-0.90], p<0.001) in univariable analysis; however the relationship lost significance after multivariable adjustment. For FIGO IB2-IVA patients, the use of suboptimal RT was associated with uninsured status (OR [95%CI]=1.33 [1.07-1.65], p=0.011) in adjusted analyses. Among all patients, overall mortality was increased with Medicaid (HR [95%CI]=1.16 [1.05-1.28], p=0.003) and uninsured status (HR [95%CI]=1.17 [1.01-1.34], p=0.031) in multivariable analysis. Cancer specific mortality survival trended towards significance in multivariable analyses for both Medicaid (HR [95%CI]=1.11 [1.00-1.24] and uninsured status (HR [95%CI]=1.14 [0.98-1.33]). CONCLUSIONS: Disparities in cervical cancer treatment with regard to insurance status are apparent in a recent cohort of American patients. Later stage at presentation and differences in management partially account for the inferior prognostic outcomes associated with Medicaid and uninsured status.
INTRODUCTION: Our study sought to characterize the presentation, local management and outcomes of invasive cervical cancer with regard to patient insurance status. METHODS: We queried the NCI-SEER database for invasive cervical cancer cases in patients aged 18-64 from 2007 to 2011. We analyzed clinical and socioeconomic data with regard insurance status (insured, Medicaid, or uninsured). We tested for associations between patient insurance status and treatment with definitive surgery for FIGO IA2-IB1patients, and treatment with suboptimal radiation therapy (RT) for FIGO IB2-IVApatients (other than combination external beam and brachytherapy). We evaluated overall and cause specific survival according to insurance status. RESULTS: 11,714 cases were analyzed: 60% insured, 31% Medicaid, and 9% uninsured. FIGO III/IV stage at presentation was more frequent with Medicaid (40%) and uninsured (42%) compared to insured patients (28%) (p<0.001). For FIGO IA2-IB1patients, receipt of definitive surgery was inversely associated with uninsured status (OR [95%CI]=0.65 [0.47-0.90], p<0.001) in univariable analysis; however the relationship lost significance after multivariable adjustment. For FIGO IB2-IVApatients, the use of suboptimal RT was associated with uninsured status (OR [95%CI]=1.33 [1.07-1.65], p=0.011) in adjusted analyses. Among all patients, overall mortality was increased with Medicaid (HR [95%CI]=1.16 [1.05-1.28], p=0.003) and uninsured status (HR [95%CI]=1.17 [1.01-1.34], p=0.031) in multivariable analysis. Cancer specific mortality survival trended towards significance in multivariable analyses for both Medicaid (HR [95%CI]=1.11 [1.00-1.24] and uninsured status (HR [95%CI]=1.14 [0.98-1.33]). CONCLUSIONS: Disparities in cervical cancer treatment with regard to insurance status are apparent in a recent cohort of American patients. Later stage at presentation and differences in management partially account for the inferior prognostic outcomes associated with Medicaid and uninsured status.
Authors: Evelyn P Whitlock; Kimberly K Vesco; Michelle Eder; Jennifer S Lin; Caitlyn A Senger; Brittany U Burda Journal: Ann Intern Med Date: 2011-10-17 Impact factor: 25.391
Authors: Judith Swan; Nancy Breen; Barry I Graubard; Timothy S McNeel; Donald Blackman; Florence K Tangka; Rachel Ballard-Barbash Journal: Cancer Date: 2010-10-15 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Kimberly L Levinson; Robert E Bristow; Pamela K Donohue; Norma F Kanarek; Cornelia L Trimble Journal: Gynecol Oncol Date: 2011-05-28 Impact factor: 5.482
Authors: Reshma Jagsi; Paul Abrahamse; Sarah T Hawley; John J Graff; Ann S Hamilton; Steven J Katz Journal: Cancer Date: 2011-06-29 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: J Hsia; E Kemper; C Kiefe; J Zapka; S Sofaer; M Pettinger; D Bowen; M Limacher; L Lillington; E Mason Journal: Prev Med Date: 2000-09 Impact factor: 4.018
Authors: Stephen R Grant; Gary V Walker; Matthew Koshy; Simona F Shaitelman; Ann H Klopp; Steven J Frank; Thomas J Pugh; Pamela K Allen; Usama Mahmood Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2015-08-28 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Shaina F Bruce; Tanvi V Joshi; Inna Chervoneva; Misung Yi; Sudeshna Chatterjee-Paer; Elizabeth R Burton; Mitchell I Edelson; Joel I Sorosky; Mark S Shahin Journal: Obstet Gynecol Date: 2019-09 Impact factor: 7.623
Authors: Wonsuk Yoo; Sangmi Kim; Warner K Huh; Sarah Dilley; Steven S Coughlin; Edward E Partridge; Yunmi Chung; Vivian Dicks; Jae-Kwan Lee; Sejong Bae Journal: PLoS One Date: 2017-02-24 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Michael D Schad; Joanna Moore; Fabian Camacho; Roger T Anderson; Leigh A Cantrell; Timothy N Showalter Journal: Medicine (Baltimore) Date: 2019-08 Impact factor: 1.817