Akshat M Patel1, Omer Ali1, Radhika Kainthla2, Syed M Rizvi1, Farrukh T Awan1, Toral Patel3, Edward Pan4, Elizabeth Maher4, Neil B Desai5, Robert Timmerman5, Kiran A Kumar5, Praveen Ramakrishnan Geethakumari1. 1. Division of Hematologic Malignancies and Stem Cell Transplantation, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Texas, USA. 2. Division of Hematology/Oncology, Parkland Health and Hospital System, Dallas, Texas, USA. 3. Department of Neurosurgery, Parkland Health and Hospital System, Dallas, Texas, USA. 4. Department of Neurology, Parkland Health and Hospital System, Dallas, Texas, USA. 5. Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Texas, USA.
Abstract
Background: This study analyzes sociodemographic barriers for primary CNS lymphoma (PCNSL) treatment and outcomes at a public safety-net hospital versus a private tertiary academic institution. We hypothesized that these barriers would lead to access disparities and poorer outcomes in the safety-net population. Methods: We reviewed records of PCNSL patients from 2007-2020 (n = 95) at a public safety-net hospital (n = 33) and a private academic center (n = 62) staffed by the same university. Demographics, treatment patterns, and outcomes were analyzed. Results: Patients at the safety-net hospital were significantly younger, more commonly Black or Hispanic, and had a higher prevalence of HIV/AIDS. They were significantly less likely to receive induction chemotherapy (67% vs 86%, P = .003) or consolidation autologous stem cell transplantation (0% vs. 47%, P = .001), but received more whole-brain radiation therapy (35% vs 16%, P = .001). Younger age and receiving any consolidation therapy were associated with improved progression-free (PFS, P = .001) and overall survival (OS, P = .001). Hospital location had no statistical impact on PFS (P = .725) or OS (P = .226) on an age-adjusted analysis. Conclusions: Our study shows significant differences in treatment patterns for PCNSL between a public safety-net hospital and an academic cancer center. A significant survival difference was not demonstrated, which is likely multifactorial, but likely was positively impacted by the shared multidisciplinary care delivery between the institutions. As personalized therapies for PCNSL are being developed, equitable access including clinical trials should be advocated for resource-limited settings.
Background: This study analyzes sociodemographic barriers for primary CNS lymphoma (PCNSL) treatment and outcomes at a public safety-net hospital versus a private tertiary academic institution. We hypothesized that these barriers would lead to access disparities and poorer outcomes in the safety-net population. Methods: We reviewed records of PCNSL patients from 2007-2020 (n = 95) at a public safety-net hospital (n = 33) and a private academic center (n = 62) staffed by the same university. Demographics, treatment patterns, and outcomes were analyzed. Results: Patients at the safety-net hospital were significantly younger, more commonly Black or Hispanic, and had a higher prevalence of HIV/AIDS. They were significantly less likely to receive induction chemotherapy (67% vs 86%, P = .003) or consolidation autologous stem cell transplantation (0% vs. 47%, P = .001), but received more whole-brain radiation therapy (35% vs 16%, P = .001). Younger age and receiving any consolidation therapy were associated with improved progression-free (PFS, P = .001) and overall survival (OS, P = .001). Hospital location had no statistical impact on PFS (P = .725) or OS (P = .226) on an age-adjusted analysis. Conclusions: Our study shows significant differences in treatment patterns for PCNSL between a public safety-net hospital and an academic cancer center. A significant survival difference was not demonstrated, which is likely multifactorial, but likely was positively impacted by the shared multidisciplinary care delivery between the institutions. As personalized therapies for PCNSL are being developed, equitable access including clinical trials should be advocated for resource-limited settings.
Authors: Lauren E Abrey; Tracy T Batchelor; Andrés J M Ferreri; Mary Gospodarowicz; Elisa J Pulczynski; Emanuele Zucca; Justine R Smith; Agnieszka Korfel; Carole Soussain; Lisa M DeAngelis; Edward A Neuwelt; Brian Patrick O'Neill; Eckhard Thiel; Tamara Shenkier; Fransesc Graus; Martin van den Bent; John F Seymour; Philip Poortmans; James O Armitage; Franco Cavalli Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2005-06-13 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Patrick G Morris; Denise D Correa; Joachim Yahalom; Jeffrey J Raizer; David Schiff; Barbara Grant; Sean Grimm; Rose K Lai; Anne S Reiner; Kathy Panageas; Sasan Karimi; Richard Curry; Gaurav Shah; Lauren E Abrey; Lisa M DeAngelis; Antonio Omuro Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2013-10-07 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: James L Rubenstein; Eric D Hsi; Jeffrey L Johnson; Sin-Ho Jung; Megan O Nakashima; Barbara Grant; Bruce D Cheson; Lawrence D Kaplan Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2013-04-08 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: C Schultz; C Scott; W Sherman; B Donahue; J Fields; K Murray; B Fisher; R Abrams; J Meis-Kindblom Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 1996-02 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Nathan Chertack; Rashed A Ghandour; Nirmish Singla; Yuval Freifeld; Ryan C Hutchinson; Kevin Courtney; I Alex Bowman; Waddah Arafat; Xiaosong Meng; Joseph A Moore; Ahmet M Aydin; Arthur I Sagalowsky; Vitaly Margulis; Yair Lotan; Solomon L Woldu; Aditya Bagrodia Journal: Cancer Date: 2020-08-10 Impact factor: 6.860