Speicher Paul J, Englum Brian R, Ganapathi Asvin M, Wang Xiaofei, Hartwig Matthew G, D'Amico Thomas A, Berry Mark F
*Department of Surgery, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC †Department of Biostatistics and Bioinformatics, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC ‡Department of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Stanford University Medical Center, Palo Alto, CA.
Ann Surg. 2017 Apr;265(4):743-749. doi: 10.1097/SLA.0000000000001702.
An association between volume and outcomes has been observed for esophagectomy, though little is known about why or how patients choose low- or high-volume centers. The purpose of this study was to evaluate how travel burden and hospital volume influence treatment and outcomes of patients with locally advanced esophageal cancer.
Predictors of receiving esophagectomy for patients with T1-3N1M0 mid or distal esophageal cancer in the National Cancer Data Base from 2006 to 2011 were identified using multivariable logistic regression. Survival was compared using propensity score-matched groups: patients in the bottom quartile of travel distance who underwent treatment at low-volume facilities (Local) and patients in the top quartile of travel distance who underwent treatment at high-volume facilities (Travel).
Of 4979 patients who met inclusion criteria, we identified 867 Local patients who traveled 2.7 [interquartile range (IQR): 1.6-4 miles] miles to centers that treated 2.6 (IQR: 1.9-3.3) esophageal cancers per year, and 317 Travel patients who traveled 107.1 (IQR: 65-247) miles to centers treating 31.9 (IQR: 30.9-38.5) cases. Travel patients were more likely to undergo esophagectomy (67.8% vs 42.9%, P < 0.001) and had significantly better 5-year survival (39.8% vs 20.6%, P < 0.001) than Local patients.
Patients who travel longer distances to high-volume centers have significantly different treatment and better outcomes than patients who stay close to home at low-volume centers. Strategies that support patient travel for treatment at high-volume centers may improve esophageal cancer outcomes.
食管癌手术的手术量与预后之间存在关联,不过对于患者为何以及如何选择低手术量或高手术量中心,我们知之甚少。本研究的目的是评估出行负担和医院手术量如何影响局部晚期食管癌患者的治疗及预后。
利用多变量逻辑回归确定2006年至2011年美国国家癌症数据库中T1-3N1M0期食管中下段癌患者接受食管癌切除术的预测因素。采用倾向评分匹配组比较生存率:出行距离处于下四分位数且在低手术量机构接受治疗的患者(本地组),以及出行距离处于上四分位数且在高手术量机构接受治疗的患者(出行组)。
在4979例符合纳入标准的患者中,我们确定了867例本地组患者,他们前往每年治疗2.6例(四分位间距[IQR]:1.9 - 3.3)食管癌的中心,出行距离为2.7英里(IQR:1.6 - 4英里);以及317例出行组患者,他们前往每年治疗31.9例(IQR:30.9 - 38.5)食管癌的中心,出行距离为107.1英里(IQR:65 - 247英里)。出行组患者比本地组患者更有可能接受食管癌切除术(67.8%对42.9%,P < 0.001),且5年生存率显著更高(39.8%对20.6%,P < 0.001)。
与在本地低手术量中心接受治疗的患者相比,前往高手术量中心就诊的患者治疗方式显著不同,预后更好。支持患者前往高手术量中心接受治疗的策略可能会改善食管癌的治疗效果。