BACKGROUND: High-volume hospitals are associated with improved outcomes in glioblastoma (GBM). However, the impact of travel burden to high-volume centers is poorly understood. We examined post-operative outcomes between GBM patients that underwent treatment at local, low-volume hospitals with those that traveled long distances to high-volume hospitals. METHODS: The National Cancer Database was queried for GBM patients that underwent surgery (2010-2014). We established two cohorts: patients in the lowest quartile of travel distance and volume (Short-travel/Low-Volume: STLV) and patients in the highest quartile of travel and volume (Long-travel/High-Volume: LTHV). Outcomes analyzed were 30-day, 90-day mortality, overall survival, 30-day readmission, and hospital length of stay. RESULTS: Of 35,529 cases, STLV patients (n = 3414) traveled a median of 3 miles (Interquartile range [IQR] 1.8-4.2) to low-volume centers (5 [3-7] annual cases) and LTHV patients (n = 3808) traveled a median of 62 miles [44.1-111.3] to high-volume centers (48 [42-71]). LTHV patients were younger, had lower Charlson scores, largely received care at academic centers (84.4% vs 11.9%), were less likely to be minorities (8.1% vs 17.1%) or underinsured (6.9% vs 12.1), and were more likely to receive trimodality therapy (75.6% vs 69.2%; all p < 0.001). On adjusted analysis, LTHV predicted improved overall survival (HR 0.87, p = 0.002), decreased 90-day mortality (OR 0.72, p = 0.019), lower 30-day readmission (OR 0.42, p < 0.001), and shorter hospitalizations (RR 0.79, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Glioblastoma patients who travel farther to high-volume centers have superior post-operative outcomes compared to patients who receive treatment locally at low-volume centers. Strategies that facilitate patient travel to high-volume hospitals may improve outcomes.
BACKGROUND: High-volume hospitals are associated with improved outcomes in glioblastoma (GBM). However, the impact of travel burden to high-volume centers is poorly understood. We examined post-operative outcomes between GBMpatients that underwent treatment at local, low-volume hospitals with those that traveled long distances to high-volume hospitals. METHODS: The National Cancer Database was queried for GBMpatients that underwent surgery (2010-2014). We established two cohorts: patients in the lowest quartile of travel distance and volume (Short-travel/Low-Volume: STLV) and patients in the highest quartile of travel and volume (Long-travel/High-Volume: LTHV). Outcomes analyzed were 30-day, 90-day mortality, overall survival, 30-day readmission, and hospital length of stay. RESULTS: Of 35,529 cases, STLVpatients (n = 3414) traveled a median of 3 miles (Interquartile range [IQR] 1.8-4.2) to low-volume centers (5 [3-7] annual cases) and LTHVpatients (n = 3808) traveled a median of 62 miles [44.1-111.3] to high-volume centers (48 [42-71]). LTHVpatients were younger, had lower Charlson scores, largely received care at academic centers (84.4% vs 11.9%), were less likely to be minorities (8.1% vs 17.1%) or underinsured (6.9% vs 12.1), and were more likely to receive trimodality therapy (75.6% vs 69.2%; all p < 0.001). On adjusted analysis, LTHV predicted improved overall survival (HR 0.87, p = 0.002), decreased 90-day mortality (OR 0.72, p = 0.019), lower 30-day readmission (OR 0.42, p < 0.001), and shorter hospitalizations (RR 0.79, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS:Glioblastomapatients who travel farther to high-volume centers have superior post-operative outcomes compared to patients who receive treatment locally at low-volume centers. Strategies that facilitate patient travel to high-volume hospitals may improve outcomes.
Authors: John D Birkmeyer; Andrea E Siewers; Emily V A Finlayson; Therese A Stukel; F Lee Lucas; Ida Batista; H Gilbert Welch; David E Wennberg Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2002-04-11 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Debraj Mukherjee; Hasan A Zaidi; Thomas Kosztowski; Kaisorn L Chaichana; Henry Brem; David C Chang; Alfredo Quiñones-Hinojosa Journal: Arch Surg Date: 2010-03
Authors: M Lacroix; D Abi-Said; D R Fourney; Z L Gokaslan; W Shi; F DeMonte; F F Lang; I E McCutcheon; S J Hassenbusch; E Holland; K Hess; C Michael; D Miller; R Sawaya Journal: J Neurosurg Date: 2001-08 Impact factor: 5.115
Authors: Roger Stupp; Warren P Mason; Martin J van den Bent; Michael Weller; Barbara Fisher; Martin J B Taphoorn; Karl Belanger; Alba A Brandes; Christine Marosi; Ulrich Bogdahn; Jürgen Curschmann; Robert C Janzer; Samuel K Ludwin; Thierry Gorlia; Anouk Allgeier; Denis Lacombe; J Gregory Cairncross; Elizabeth Eisenhauer; René O Mirimanoff Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2005-03-10 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: John A Cowan; Justin B Dimick; Jean-Christophe Leveque; B Gregory Thompson; Gilbert R Upchurch; Julian T Hoff Journal: Neurosurgery Date: 2003-01 Impact factor: 4.654
Authors: Vincent Huang; Stephen P Miranda; Ryan Dimentberg; Kaitlyn Shultz; Scott D McClintock; Neil R Malhotra Journal: J Neurol Surg B Skull Base Date: 2021-02-04
Authors: Seon-Jin Yoon; Juhwan Noh; Hye Young Son; Ju Hyung Moon; Eui-Hyun Kim; Sahng Wook Park; Se Hoon Kim; Jong Hee Chang; Yong-Min Huh; Seok-Gu Kang Journal: Cancer Med Date: 2020-11-07 Impact factor: 4.452
Authors: Tiffany R Hodges; Collin M Labak; Uma V Mahajan; Christina Huang Wright; James Wright; Gino Cioffi; Haley Gittleman; Eric Z Herring; Xiaofei Zhou; Kelsey Duncan; Carol Kruchko; Andrew E Sloan; Jill S Barnholtz-Sloan Journal: Neurooncol Adv Date: 2021-03-06
Authors: Jad Zreik; Panagiotis Kerezoudis; Mohammed Ali Alvi; Yagiz U Yolcu; Sani H Kizilbash Journal: Front Oncol Date: 2021-11-09 Impact factor: 6.244
Authors: Caroline S Clarke; Mariya Melnychuk; Angus I G Ramsay; Cecilia Vindrola-Padros; Claire Levermore; Ravi Barod; Axel Bex; John Hines; Muntzer M Mughal; Kathy Pritchard-Jones; Maxine Tran; David C Shackley; Stephen Morris; Naomi J Fulop; Rachael M Hunter Journal: Appl Health Econ Health Policy Date: 2022-07-22 Impact factor: 3.686