Seth J Rotz1, Wei Wei2, Stefanie M Thomas1, Rabi Hanna1. 1. Department of Pediatric Hematology, Oncology, and Blood and Marrow Transplantation, Pediatric Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio. 2. Department of Quantitative Health Sciences, Lerner Research Institute Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Socioeconomic and demographic categories such as income, race, insurance status, and treatment center type are associated with outcomes in acute leukemia. This study was aimed at determining whether the distance to treatment center affects overall survival for children and young adults with acute leukemia. METHODS: The National Cancer Database was queried for patients 39 years old or younger who were diagnosed with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) or acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL). A backward elimination procedure was used to select final multivariate Cox models. RESULTS: In total, 12,301 patients with AML and 22,683 patients with ALL were analyzed. The ALL model included distance to treatment center, Charlson-Deyo score, age, race, insurance status, and community income level. US census definitions of urban and rural were not statistically significant, and no interaction was significant for included variables. Compared with distances > 50 miles, all other distances were associated with improved survival (hazard ratio [HR] for ≤10 miles, 0.91; P = .04; HR for >10 to ≤20 miles, 0.86; P = .004; HR for >20 to ≤50 miles, 0.87; P = .005). The final model for AML included the same variables as the ALL model except for distance to treatment center, which was not statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS: For children and young adults with ALL, distances > 50 miles are associated with inferior overall survival; however, no difference is seen for AML. Although it is unknown whether differences in survival for patients with ALL based on distance are driven by relapse or treatment-related mortality, increased attention to adherence, supportive care, and logistics for patients traveling long distances is warranted. LAY SUMMARY: For children and young adults with acute lymphoblastic leukemia, living more than 50 miles from the treatment center is associated with worse outcomes.
BACKGROUND: Socioeconomic and demographic categories such as income, race, insurance status, and treatment center type are associated with outcomes in acute leukemia. This study was aimed at determining whether the distance to treatment center affects overall survival for children and young adults with acute leukemia. METHODS: The National Cancer Database was queried for patients 39 years old or younger who were diagnosed with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) or acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL). A backward elimination procedure was used to select final multivariate Cox models. RESULTS: In total, 12,301 patients with AML and 22,683 patients with ALL were analyzed. The ALL model included distance to treatment center, Charlson-Deyo score, age, race, insurance status, and community income level. US census definitions of urban and rural were not statistically significant, and no interaction was significant for included variables. Compared with distances > 50 miles, all other distances were associated with improved survival (hazard ratio [HR] for ≤10 miles, 0.91; P = .04; HR for >10 to ≤20 miles, 0.86; P = .004; HR for >20 to ≤50 miles, 0.87; P = .005). The final model for AML included the same variables as the ALL model except for distance to treatment center, which was not statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS: For children and young adults with ALL, distances > 50 miles are associated with inferior overall survival; however, no difference is seen for AML. Although it is unknown whether differences in survival for patients with ALL based on distance are driven by relapse or treatment-related mortality, increased attention to adherence, supportive care, and logistics for patients traveling long distances is warranted. LAY SUMMARY: For children and young adults with acute lymphoblastic leukemia, living more than 50 miles from the treatment center is associated with worse outcomes.
Authors: Yimei Li; Joanna G Newton; Kelly D Getz; Yuan-Shung Huang; Alix E Seif; Brian T Fisher; Richard Aplenc; Lena E Winestone Journal: Pediatr Blood Cancer Date: 2018-12-26 Impact factor: 3.167
Authors: Daniel J Boffa; Joshua E Rosen; Katherine Mallin; Ashley Loomis; Greer Gay; Bryan Palis; Kathleen Thoburn; Donna Gress; Daniel P McKellar; Lawrence N Shulman; Matthew A Facktor; David P Winchester Journal: JAMA Oncol Date: 2017-12-01 Impact factor: 31.777
Authors: Michael E Rytting; Elias J Jabbour; Jeffrey L Jorgensen; Farhad Ravandi; Anna R Franklin; Tapan M Kadia; Naveen Pemmaraju; Naval G Daver; Alessandra Ferrajoli; Guillermo Garcia-Manero; Marina Y Konopleva; Gautam Borthakur; Rebecca Garris; Sa Wang; Sherry Pierce; Kurt Schroeder; Steven M Kornblau; Deborah A Thomas; Jorge E Cortes; Susan M O'Brien; Hagop M Kantarjian Journal: Am J Hematol Date: 2016-06-30 Impact factor: 10.047
Authors: Thomas B Alexander; Lei Wang; Hiroto Inaba; Brandon M Triplett; Stanley Pounds; Raul C Ribeiro; Ching-Hon Pui; Jeffrey E Rubnitz Journal: Cancer Date: 2017-05-30 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Vijaya R Bhatt; Valerie Shostrom; Smith Giri; Krishna Gundabolu; K M Monirul Islam; Frederick R Appelbaum; Lori J Maness Journal: Am J Hematol Date: 2017-06-01 Impact factor: 10.047
Authors: Cristina P Rodriguez; Rachid Baz; Rony Abou Jawde; Lisa A Rybicki; Matt E Kalaycio; Anjali Advani; Ronald Sobecks; Mikkael A Sekeres Journal: Leuk Res Date: 2007-08-28 Impact factor: 3.156
Authors: Smita Bhatia; Wendy Landier; Lindsey Hageman; Heeyoung Kim; Yanjun Chen; Kristine R Crews; William E Evans; Bruce Bostrom; Jacqueline Casillas; David S Dickens; Kelly W Maloney; Joseph P Neglia; Yaddanapudi Ravindranath; A Kim Ritchey; F Lennie Wong; Mary V Relling Journal: Blood Date: 2014-05-14 Impact factor: 22.113
Authors: Krista M Isaac; Daniel R Reed; Raj Piyush Desai; Eli Williams; Rajesh Balkrishnan; Michael K Keng; Karen K Ballen Journal: Cancer Rep (Hoboken) Date: 2021-03-09