Literature DB >> 28472547

Impact of travel distance to the treatment facility on overall mortality in US patients with prostate cancer.

Malte W Vetterlein1,2,3, Björn Löppenberg1,2,4, Patrick Karabon1,5, Deepansh Dalela1, Tarun Jindal1, Akshay Sood1, Felix K-H Chun3, Quoc-Dien Trinh2, Mani Menon1, Firas Abdollah1.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The objective of this study was to investigate the impact of travel distance to the treating facility on the risk of overall mortality (OM) among US patients with prostate cancer (PCa).
METHODS: In total, 775,999 patients who had PCa in all stages and received treatment with different strategies (radical prostatectomy, radiation therapy, observation, androgen-deprivation therapy, multimodal treatment, and chemotherapy) were drawn from the National Cancer Data Base from 2004 through 2012. Independent predictors of travel distance (intermediate [12.5-49.9 miles] and long [49.9-249.9 miles] vs short[<12.5 miles]) and its effect on OM were calculated using multivariable regression analyses. Additional analyses evaluated the distance effect on OM in selected subgroups.
RESULTS: In total, 54.5%, 33.4%, and 12.1% of patients traveled short, intermediate, and long distances, respectively. Residency in rural areas and the receipt of treatment at academic/high-volume centers independently predicted long travel distance. Non-Hispanic black men and Medicaid-insured men were less likely to travel long distances (all P < .001). Overall, traveling a long distance (hazard ratio, 0.87; 95% confidence interval, 0.83-0.92; P < .001) was associated with lower OM risk compared with traveling a short distance. This held true among non-Hispanic white men; privately insured and Medicare-insured men; those who underwent radical prostatectomy, received radiation therapy, and received multimodal strategies; and those who received treatment at academic/high-volume centers (P < .01), but not among non-Hispanic black men (P = .3). Long travel distance was associated with an increased OM in Medicaid-insured patients (P < .001).
CONCLUSIONS: An OM benefit was observed among men who traveled long distances for PCa treatment, which is likely to be a reflection of centralization of care and more favorable patient-level characteristics in those travelers. Furthermore, the survival benefit mediated by long travel distances appears to be influenced by baseline socioeconomic, treatment, and facility-level factors. Cancer 2017;123:3241-52.
© 2017 American Cancer Society. © 2017 American Cancer Society.

Entities:  

Keywords:  United States; health care disparities; health services accessibility; mortality; prostatic neoplasms

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28472547     DOI: 10.1002/cncr.30744

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cancer        ISSN: 0008-543X            Impact factor:   6.860


  22 in total

1.  Data Integration through Ontology-Based Data Access to Support Integrative Data Analysis: A Case Study of Cancer Survival.

Authors:  Hansi Zhang; Yi Guo; Qian Li; Thomas J George; Elizabeth A Shenkman; Jiang Bian
Journal:  Proceedings (IEEE Int Conf Bioinformatics Biomed)       Date:  2017-12-18

2.  Rural and urban patients with diffuse large B-cell and follicular lymphoma experience reduced overall survival: a National Cancer DataBase study.

Authors:  Andrew J Ritter; Jordan S Goldstein; Amy A Ayers; Christopher R Flowers
Journal:  Leuk Lymphoma       Date:  2019-01-11

3.  Assessing the effect of data integration on predictive ability of cancer survival models.

Authors:  Yi Guo; Jiang Bian; Francois Modave; Qian Li; Thomas J George; Mattia Prosperi; Elizabeth Shenkman
Journal:  Health Informatics J       Date:  2019-01-23       Impact factor: 2.681

4.  The impact of traveling distance and hospital volume on post-surgical outcomes for patients with glioblastoma.

Authors:  Christian Lopez Ramos; Michael G Brandel; Jeffrey A Steinberg; Arvin R Wali; Robert C Rennert; David R Santiago-Dieppa; Reith R Sarkar; J Scott Pannell; James D Murphy; Alexander A Khalessi
Journal:  J Neurooncol       Date:  2018-11-20       Impact factor: 4.130

5.  National practice patterns for lymph node irradiation in 197,000 men receiving external beam radiotherapy for localized prostate cancer.

Authors:  Adam B Weiner; Oliver S Ko; Alec Zhu; Daniel E Spratt; Jim C Hu; Edward M Schaeffer
Journal:  Urol Oncol       Date:  2019-01-02       Impact factor: 3.498

6.  Racial and Ethnic Disparities in Travel for Head and Neck Cancer Treatment and the Impact of Travel Distance on Survival.

Authors:  Evan M Graboyes; Mark A Ellis; Hong Li; John M Kaczmar; Anand K Sharma; Eric J Lentsch; Terry A Day; Chanita Hughes Halbert
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2018-06-22       Impact factor: 6.860

7.  Influence of Geography on Prostate Cancer Treatment.

Authors:  Chad Tang; Xiudong Lei; Grace L Smith; Hubert Y Pan; Karen E Hoffman; Rachit Kumar; Brian F Chapin; Ya-Chen Tina Shih; Steven J Frank; Benjamin D Smith
Journal:  Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys       Date:  2020-12-13       Impact factor: 7.038

8.  Treatment Approaches and Outcomes for Primary Mediastinal Sarcoma: Analysis of 976 Patients.

Authors:  Kathryn E Engelhardt; Malcolm M DeCamp; Anthony D Yang; Karl Y Bilimoria; David D Odell
Journal:  Ann Thorac Surg       Date:  2018-05-02       Impact factor: 4.330

9.  Distance to treatment center is associated with survival in children and young adults with acute lymphoblastic leukemia.

Authors:  Seth J Rotz; Wei Wei; Stefanie M Thomas; Rabi Hanna
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2020-09-10       Impact factor: 6.860

Review 10.  A narrative review of sociodemographic risk and disparities in screening, diagnosis, treatment, and outcomes of the most common extrathoracic malignancies in the United States.

Authors:  Sarah Singh; Praveen Sridhar
Journal:  J Thorac Dis       Date:  2021-06       Impact factor: 2.895

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.