BC Cancer - Victoria, British Columbia, Canada; and.
Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center, and.
J Natl Compr Canc Netw. 2019 Sep 1;17(9):1100-1108. doi: 10.6004/jnccn.2019.7298.
Population-based studies suggest that patients with multiple myeloma (MM) have better outcomes when treated at high-volume facilities, but the relative contribution of provider expertise and hospital resources to improved outcomes is unknown. This study explored how treating facility, individual provider volume, and patient-sharing between MM specialists and community providers influenced outcomes for patients with MM.
A state cancer registry linked to public and private insurance claims was used to identify a cohort of patients diagnosed with MM in 2006 through 2012. Three multivariable Cox models were used to examine how the following factors impacted overall survival: (1) evaluation at an NCI-designated Comprehensive Cancer Center (NCICCC), (2) the primary oncologist's volume of patients with MM, and (3) patient-sharing between MM specialists and community oncologists.
A total of 1,029 patients diagnosed with MM in 2006 through 2012 were identified. Patients who were not evaluated at an NCICCC had an increased risk of mortality compared with those evaluated at an NCICCC (hazard ratio [HR], 1.50; 95% CI, 1.21-1.86; P<.001). Compared with patients treated by NCICCC MM specialists, those treated by both low-volume community providers (HR, 1.47; 95% CI, 1.14-1.90; P<.01) and high-volume community providers (HR, 1.29; 95% CI, 1.04-1.61; P<.05) had a higher risk of mortality. No difference in mortality was seen between patients treated by NCICCC MM specialists and those treated by the highest-volume community oncologists in the ninth and tenth deciles (HR, 1.08; 95% CI, 0.84-1.37; P=.5591). Patients treated by community oncologists had a higher risk of mortality regardless of patient-sharing compared with patients treated by MM specialists (eg, community oncologist with a history of sharing vs NCICCC MM specialist: HR, 1.49; 95% CI, 1.10-2.02; P<.05).
Findings of this study add to the accumulating evidence showing that patients with MM benefit from care at high-volume facilities, and suggest that similar outcomes can be achieved by the highest-volume providers in the community.
基于人群的研究表明,多发性骨髓瘤(MM)患者在高容量医疗机构接受治疗时,其预后更好,但专家提供的服务质量和医院资源对改善预后的相对贡献尚不清楚。本研究探讨了治疗机构、个体提供者的工作量以及 MM 专家和社区提供者之间的患者共享如何影响 MM 患者的预后。
本研究使用州癌症登记处与公共和私人保险索赔相链接,以确定 2006 年至 2012 年间诊断为 MM 的患者队列。使用三个多变量 Cox 模型来检查以下因素对总生存率的影响:(1)在 NCI 指定的综合癌症中心(NCICCC)进行评估,(2)主要肿瘤学家的 MM 患者人数,以及(3)MM 专家与社区肿瘤学家之间的患者共享。
共确定了 2006 年至 2012 年间诊断为 MM 的 1029 名患者。与在 NCICCC 接受评估的患者相比,未在 NCICCC 接受评估的患者的死亡率更高(风险比[HR],1.50;95%CI,1.21-1.86;P<.001)。与接受 NCICCC MM 专家治疗的患者相比,接受低容量社区提供者(HR,1.47;95%CI,1.14-1.90;P<.01)和高容量社区提供者(HR,1.29;95%CI,1.04-1.61;P<.05)治疗的患者死亡风险更高。在 NCICCC MM 专家治疗的患者和第 9 个和第 10 个十分位数中最高容量社区肿瘤学家治疗的患者之间,死亡率无差异(HR,1.08;95%CI,0.84-1.37;P=.5591)。与接受 MM 专家治疗的患者相比,无论是否存在患者共享,接受社区肿瘤学家治疗的患者死亡风险更高(例如,有共享史的社区肿瘤学家与 NCICCC MM 专家:HR,1.49;95%CI,1.10-2.02;P<.05)。
本研究的结果增加了越来越多的证据,表明 MM 患者受益于高容量医疗机构的治疗,并表明社区中最高容量的提供者可以实现类似的结果。