Jaqueline C Avila1, J Andrew Livingston2, Ana M Rodriguez3, Anne C Kirchhoff4, Yong-Fang Kuo1, Sapna Kaul1. 1. 1 Department of Preventive Medicine and Community Health, University of Texas Medical Branch , Galveston, Texas. 2. 2 Department of Sarcoma Medical Oncology, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center , Houston, Texas. 3. 3 Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Texas Medical Branch , Galveston, Texas. 4. 4 Department of Pediatric Hematology/Oncology and Huntsman Cancer Institute, University of Utah , Salt Lake City, Utah.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Examine disparities in survival for adolescents and young adults (AYAs) diagnosed with bone and soft tissue sarcomas in Texas compared with national estimates. METHODS: AYAs with sarcomas diagnosed between 1995 and 2012 at ages 15-39 years were identified from the Texas Cancer Registry (TCR) and Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) program. Patient demographic, treatment, and clinical characteristics were compared between TCR and SEER using chi-squared tests. Five-year survival was computed using the Kaplan-Meier method. Cox proportional hazards (CPH) models evaluated the factors associated with the risk of mortality between and within the two datasets. RESULTS: Sarcoma patients in TCR were more likely to be Hispanic, uninsured, diagnosed at late stage, and have lower rates of surgery as the first line of treatment than those in SEER. In Texas, 5-year survival was 68.7% versus 72.2% in SEER (p < 0.001). However, after including surgery in our fully adjusted CPH model, survival differences between the two datasets were no longer observed. In these models, males, and those living in nonmetropolitan areas were more likely to die than their counterparts in both datasets. In TCR, those who lived in the U.S. and Mexico border had higher mortality. In SEER, Hispanics and non-Hispanic blacks had higher mortality. CONCLUSION: The adjusted AYA sarcoma survival in Texas was similar to that of SEER, but patients in Texas were more likely to be uninsured and have lower surgery rates. Those living in the U.S. and Mexico border in Texas faced lower survival. These results are important for delineating effective care for this high-risk patient group.
PURPOSE: Examine disparities in survival for adolescents and young adults (AYAs) diagnosed with bone and soft tissue sarcomas in Texas compared with national estimates. METHODS: AYAs with sarcomas diagnosed between 1995 and 2012 at ages 15-39 years were identified from the Texas Cancer Registry (TCR) and Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) program. Patient demographic, treatment, and clinical characteristics were compared between TCR and SEER using chi-squared tests. Five-year survival was computed using the Kaplan-Meier method. Cox proportional hazards (CPH) models evaluated the factors associated with the risk of mortality between and within the two datasets. RESULTS:Sarcomapatients in TCR were more likely to be Hispanic, uninsured, diagnosed at late stage, and have lower rates of surgery as the first line of treatment than those in SEER. In Texas, 5-year survival was 68.7% versus 72.2% in SEER (p < 0.001). However, after including surgery in our fully adjusted CPH model, survival differences between the two datasets were no longer observed. In these models, males, and those living in nonmetropolitan areas were more likely to die than their counterparts in both datasets. In TCR, those who lived in the U.S. and Mexico border had higher mortality. In SEER, Hispanics and non-Hispanic blacks had higher mortality. CONCLUSION: The adjusted AYA sarcoma survival in Texas was similar to that of SEER, but patients in Texas were more likely to be uninsured and have lower surgery rates. Those living in the U.S. and Mexico border in Texas faced lower survival. These results are important for delineating effective care for this high-risk patient group.
Entities:
Keywords:
SEER; Texas cancer registry; sarcoma; survival analysis
Authors: Andrea Ferrari; Iyad Sultan; Tseng Tien Huang; Carlos Rodriguez-Galindo; Ahmad Shehadeh; Cristina Meazza; Kirsten K Ness; Michela Casanova; Sheri L Spunt Journal: Pediatr Blood Cancer Date: 2011-07-25 Impact factor: 3.167
Authors: Steve R Martinez; Anthony S Robbins; Frederick J Meyers; Richard J Bold; Vijay P Khatri; James E Goodnight Journal: Cancer Date: 2008-03-01 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: R D Neal; P Tharmanathan; B France; N U Din; S Cotton; J Fallon-Ferguson; W Hamilton; A Hendry; M Hendry; R Lewis; U Macleod; E D Mitchell; M Pickett; T Rai; K Shaw; N Stuart; M L Tørring; C Wilkinson; B Williams; N Williams; J Emery Journal: Br J Cancer Date: 2015-03-31 Impact factor: 7.640
Authors: Amy M Berkman; Clark R Andersen; Vidya Puthenpura; J A Livingston; Sairah Ahmed; Branko Cuglievan; Michelle A T Hildebrandt; Michael E Roth Journal: Cancer Epidemiol Date: 2021-09-28 Impact factor: 2.984
Authors: Amy M Berkman; Clark R Andersen; Branko Cuglievan; David C McCall; Philip J Lupo; Susan K Parsons; Courtney D DiNardo; Nicholas J Short; Nitin Jain; Tapan M Kadia; J A Livingston; Michael E Roth Journal: Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev Date: 2022-06-01 Impact factor: 4.090
Authors: Amy M Berkman; Clark R Andersen; Vidya Puthenpura; J Andrew Livingston; Sairah Ahmed; Branko Cuglievan; Michelle A T Hildebrandt; Michael E Roth Journal: Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev Date: 2021-07-08 Impact factor: 4.254