OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the association of sociodemographic and hospital characteristics with adherence to National Comprehensive Cancer Network treatment guidelines for stage IB-IIA cervical cancer and to analyze the relationship between adherent care and survival. METHODS: This is a retrospective population-based cohort study of patients with stage IB-IIA invasive cervical cancer reported to the California Cancer Registry from January 1, 1995, through December 31, 2009. Adherence to National Comprehensive Cancer Network guideline care was defined by year- and stage-appropriate surgical procedures, radiation, and chemotherapy. Multivariate logistic regression, Kaplan-Meier estimate, and Cox proportional hazard models were used to examine associations between patient, tumor, and treatment characteristics and National Comprehensive Cancer Network guideline adherence and cervical cancer-specific 5-year survival. RESULTS: A total of 6,063 patients were identified. Forty-seven percent received National Comprehensive Cancer Network guideline-adherent care, and 18.8% were treated in high-volume centers (20 or more patients/year). On multivariate analysis, lowest socioeconomic status (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 0.69, 95% CI 0.57-0.84), low-middle socioeconomic status (adjusted OR 0.76, 95% CI 0.64-0.92), and Charlson-Deyo comorbidity score 1 or higher (adjusted OR 0.78, 95% CI 0.69-0.89) were patient characteristics associated with receipt of nonguideline care. Receiving adherent care was less common in low-volume centers (45.9%) than in high-volume centers (50.9%) (effect size 0.90, 95% CI 0.84-0.96). Death from cervical cancer was more common in the nonadherent group (13.3%) than in the adherent group (8.6%) (effect size 1.55, 95% CI 1.34-1.80). Black race (adjusted hazard ratio 1.56, 95% CI 1.08-2.27), Medicaid payer status (adjusted hazard ratio 1.47, 95% CI 1.15-1.87), and Charlson-Deyo comorbidity score 1 or higher (adjusted hazard ratio 2.07, 95% CI 1.68-2.56) were all associated with increased risk of dying from cervical cancer. CONCLUSION: Among patients with early-stage cervical cancer, National Comprehensive Cancer Network guideline-nonadherent care was independently associated with increased cervical cancer-specific mortality along with black race and Medicaid payer status. Nonadherence was more prevalent in patients with older age, lower socioeconomic status, and receipt of care in low-volume centers. Attention should be paid to increase guideline adherence.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the association of sociodemographic and hospital characteristics with adherence to National Comprehensive Cancer Network treatment guidelines for stage IB-IIA cervical cancer and to analyze the relationship between adherent care and survival. METHODS: This is a retrospective population-based cohort study of patients with stage IB-IIA invasive cervical cancer reported to the California Cancer Registry from January 1, 1995, through December 31, 2009. Adherence to National Comprehensive Cancer Network guideline care was defined by year- and stage-appropriate surgical procedures, radiation, and chemotherapy. Multivariate logistic regression, Kaplan-Meier estimate, and Cox proportional hazard models were used to examine associations between patient, tumor, and treatment characteristics and National Comprehensive Cancer Network guideline adherence and cervical cancer-specific 5-year survival. RESULTS: A total of 6,063 patients were identified. Forty-seven percent received National Comprehensive Cancer Network guideline-adherent care, and 18.8% were treated in high-volume centers (20 or more patients/year). On multivariate analysis, lowest socioeconomic status (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 0.69, 95% CI 0.57-0.84), low-middle socioeconomic status (adjusted OR 0.76, 95% CI 0.64-0.92), and Charlson-Deyo comorbidity score 1 or higher (adjusted OR 0.78, 95% CI 0.69-0.89) were patient characteristics associated with receipt of nonguideline care. Receiving adherent care was less common in low-volume centers (45.9%) than in high-volume centers (50.9%) (effect size 0.90, 95% CI 0.84-0.96). Death from cervical cancer was more common in the nonadherent group (13.3%) than in the adherent group (8.6%) (effect size 1.55, 95% CI 1.34-1.80). Black race (adjusted hazard ratio 1.56, 95% CI 1.08-2.27), Medicaid payer status (adjusted hazard ratio 1.47, 95% CI 1.15-1.87), and Charlson-Deyo comorbidity score 1 or higher (adjusted hazard ratio 2.07, 95% CI 1.68-2.56) were all associated with increased risk of dying from cervical cancer. CONCLUSION: Among patients with early-stage cervical cancer, National Comprehensive Cancer Network guideline-nonadherent care was independently associated with increased cervical cancer-specific mortality along with black race and Medicaid payer status. Nonadherence was more prevalent in patients with older age, lower socioeconomic status, and receipt of care in low-volume centers. Attention should be paid to increase guideline adherence.
Authors: Charles A Leath; J Michael Straughn; Tyler O Kirby; Adam Huggins; Edward E Partridge; Groesbeck P Parham Journal: Gynecol Oncol Date: 2005-08-30 Impact factor: 5.482
Authors: Linda C Harlan; Amanda L Greene; Limin X Clegg; Margaret Mooney; Jennifer L Stevens; Martin L Brown Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2005-11-21 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Christine M Pierce Campbell; Lynette J Menezes; Electra D Paskett; Anna R Giuliano Journal: Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev Date: 2012-05-03 Impact factor: 4.254
Authors: Kathleen F Brookfield; Michael C Cheung; Joseph Lucci; Lora E Fleming; Leonidas G Koniaris Journal: Cancer Date: 2009-01-01 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: J Alejandro Rauh-Hain; Jose Zubizarreta; Roni Nitecki; Alexander Melamed; Shuangshuang Fu; Kirsten Jorgensen; Paula C Brady; Valerie L Baker; Mariana Chavez-MacGregor; Sharon H Giordano; Nancy L Keating Journal: Cancer Date: 2022-06-29 Impact factor: 6.921
Authors: Roni Nitecki; Jessica Floyd; Kelly Lamiman; Mark A Clapp; Shuangshuang Fu; Kirsten Jorgensen; Alexander Melamed; Paula C Brady; Anjali Kaimal; Marcela G Del Carmen; Terri L Woodard; Larissa A Meyer; Sharon H Giordano; Pedro T Ramirez; J Alejandro Rauh-Hain Journal: Obstet Gynecol Date: 2021-10-01 Impact factor: 7.623
Authors: Michael D Toboni; Alexander Cohen; Zachary L Gentry; Stuart A Ostby; Zhixin Wang; Sejong Bae; Charles Leath Journal: Int J Gynecol Cancer Date: 2022-06-06 Impact factor: 4.661
Authors: Sarah P Huepenbecker; Shuangshuang Fu; Charlotte C Sun; Hui Zhao; Kristin M Primm; Sharon H Giordano; Larissa A Meyer Journal: Am J Obstet Gynecol Date: 2022-04-29 Impact factor: 10.693
Authors: Lisa P Spees; Stephanie B Wheeler; Mahesh Varia; Morris Weinberger; Christopher D Baggett; Xi Zhou; Victoria M Petermann; Wendy R Brewster Journal: Gynecol Oncol Date: 2018-11-12 Impact factor: 5.482
Authors: Leila T Tchelebi; Biyi Shen; Ming Wang; Louis Potters; Joseph Herman; Daniel Boffa; Joel E Segel; Henry S Park; Nicholas G Zaorsky Journal: Adv Radiat Oncol Date: 2022-03-08