Matthew P Banegas1, Linda C Harlan2, Bhupinder Mann3, K Robin Yabroff2. 1. Kaiser Permanente Northwest, The Center for Health Research, Portland, OR. Electronic address: Matthew.P.Banegas@kpchr.org. 2. Healthcare Assessment Research Branch, Healthcare Delivery Research Program, Division of Cancer Control and Population Sciences, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD. 3. Clinical Investigations Branch, Cancer Therapy Evaluation Program, Division of Cancer Treatment and Diagnosis, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To examine national, population-based utilization trends of nephron-sparing and minimally invasive techniques for the surgical management of patients with adult renal cell cancer (RCC) in the United States. METHODS: Linked data from the National Cancer Institute׳s Patterns of Care studies and the Area Health Resource File were used to evaluate trends of nephron-sparing and minimally invasive techniques in a sample of 1,110 patients newly diagnosed with American Joint Committee on Cancer stages I-II RCC, in 2004 and 2009, who underwent surgery. Descriptive statistics were used to assess patterns of surgery between 2004 and 2009. Multivariable logistic regression analyses were used to evaluate the associations between demographic, clinical, hospital, and area-level health care characteristics with surgery utilization, stratified by the subset of patients who were potentially eligible for partial nephrectomy (PN) vs. radical nephrectomy (RN) and laparoscopic RN (LRN) vs. open RN, respectively. RESULTS: Between 2004 and 2009, PN use among stage I patients with tumors≤7cm increased from 29% to 41%, respectively (P = 0.22). Among patients with stage I tumors≤4cm, use of PN significantly increased from 43% in 2004 to 55% in 2009 (P≤0.05). Among patients with stage I tumors>4 to 7cm, laparoscopic partial nephrectomy increased from 8% to 15%, whereas LRN increased from 38% to 69%, between 2004 and 2009 (P = 0.07). Significant increases in LRN use were observed for both stage I (from 43% in 2004 to 58% in 2009; P≤0.05) and stage II patients (from 16% in 2004 to 47% in 2009; P≤0.01). Patients diagnosed at an older age, with larger tumors, non-clear cell RCC and who did not receive treatment in a hospital with residency training were significantly less likely to receive PN vs. RN; whereas, those diagnosed in 2009 with stage I disease were significantly more likely to receive LRN vs. open RN. CONCLUSIONS: This study highlights a significant shift toward increased use of nephron-sparing and minimally invasive surgical techniques to treat patients with RCC in the United States. Our findings are among the first population-based reports in which most eligible patients with RCC received PN over RN. In light of the long-standing evidence on the improved patient outcomes, future investigation is warranted to identify the barriers to increased adoption of these nephron-sparing and minimally invasive approaches.
PURPOSE: To examine national, population-based utilization trends of nephron-sparing and minimally invasive techniques for the surgical management of patients with adult renal cell cancer (RCC) in the United States. METHODS: Linked data from the National Cancer Institute׳s Patterns of Care studies and the Area Health Resource File were used to evaluate trends of nephron-sparing and minimally invasive techniques in a sample of 1,110 patients newly diagnosed with American Joint Committee on Cancer stages I-II RCC, in 2004 and 2009, who underwent surgery. Descriptive statistics were used to assess patterns of surgery between 2004 and 2009. Multivariable logistic regression analyses were used to evaluate the associations between demographic, clinical, hospital, and area-level health care characteristics with surgery utilization, stratified by the subset of patients who were potentially eligible for partial nephrectomy (PN) vs. radical nephrectomy (RN) and laparoscopic RN (LRN) vs. open RN, respectively. RESULTS: Between 2004 and 2009, PN use among stage I patients with tumors≤7cm increased from 29% to 41%, respectively (P = 0.22). Among patients with stage I tumors≤4cm, use of PN significantly increased from 43% in 2004 to 55% in 2009 (P≤0.05). Among patients with stage I tumors>4 to 7cm, laparoscopic partial nephrectomy increased from 8% to 15%, whereas LRN increased from 38% to 69%, between 2004 and 2009 (P = 0.07). Significant increases in LRN use were observed for both stage I (from 43% in 2004 to 58% in 2009; P≤0.05) and stage II patients (from 16% in 2004 to 47% in 2009; P≤0.01). Patients diagnosed at an older age, with larger tumors, non-clear cell RCC and who did not receive treatment in a hospital with residency training were significantly less likely to receive PN vs. RN; whereas, those diagnosed in 2009 with stage I disease were significantly more likely to receive LRN vs. open RN. CONCLUSIONS: This study highlights a significant shift toward increased use of nephron-sparing and minimally invasive surgical techniques to treat patients with RCC in the United States. Our findings are among the first population-based reports in which most eligible patients with RCC received PN over RN. In light of the long-standing evidence on the improved patient outcomes, future investigation is warranted to identify the barriers to increased adoption of these nephron-sparing and minimally invasive approaches.
Authors: Marco Bianchi; Andreas Becker; Firas Abdollah; Quoc-Dien Trinh; Jens Hansen; Zhe Tian; Shahrokh F Shariat; Paul Perrotte; Pierre I Karakiewicz; Maxine Sun Journal: Int J Urol Date: 2013-02-19 Impact factor: 3.369
Authors: Borje Ljungberg; Karim Bensalah; Steven Canfield; Saeed Dabestani; Fabian Hofmann; Milan Hora; Markus A Kuczyk; Thomas Lam; Lorenzo Marconi; Axel S Merseburger; Peter Mulders; Thomas Powles; Michael Staehler; Alessandro Volpe; Axel Bex Journal: Eur Urol Date: 2015-01-21 Impact factor: 20.096
Authors: Douglas S Scherr; Casey Ng; Ravi Munver; R Ernest Sosa; E Darracott Vaughan; Joseph Del Pizzo Journal: Urology Date: 2003-12 Impact factor: 2.649
Authors: Hiten D Patel; Jeffrey K Mullins; Phillip M Pierorazio; Gautam Jayram; Jason E Cohen; Brian R Matlaga; Mohamad E Allaf Journal: J Urol Date: 2012-10-17 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: Tarik K Yuce; Ryan J Ellis; Jeanette Chung; Ryan P Merkow; Anthony D Yang; Nathaniel J Soper; Edward J Tanner; Edward M Schaeffer; Karl Y Bilimoria; Gregory B Auffenberg Journal: J Surg Oncol Date: 2020-01-22 Impact factor: 3.454
Authors: Mona W Schmidt; Caelan M Haney; Karl-Friedrich Kowalewski; Vasile V Bintintan; Mohammed Abu Hilal; Alberto Arezzo; Marcus Bahra; Marc G Besselink; Matthias Biebl; Luigi Boni; Michele Diana; Jan H Egberts; Lars Fischer; Nader Francis; Daniel A Hashimoto; Daniel Perez; Marlies Schijven; Moritz Schmelzle; Marek Soltes; Lee Swanstrom; Thilo Welsch; Beat P Müller-Stich; Felix Nickel Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2021-11-09 Impact factor: 3.453
Authors: Theresa Junker; Louise Duus; Benjamin S B Rasmussen; Nessn Azawi; Lars Lund; Ole Graumann; Birgitte Nørgaard Journal: Syst Rev Date: 2022-01-04
Authors: Ali A Nasrallah; Habib A Dakik; Nassib F Abou Heidar; Jad A Najdi; Oussama G Nasrallah; Mazen Mansour; Hani Tamim; Albert El Hajj Journal: Ther Adv Urol Date: 2022-03-18
Authors: Michał Rusinek; Marek Salagierski; Waldemar Różański; Bartłomiej Jakóbczyk; Michał Markowski; Marek Lipiński; Jacek Wilkosz Journal: J Pers Med Date: 2022-03-18