Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Annals of Surgical Oncology 11/2016

01-10-2016 | Healthcare Policy and Outcomes

Association of Distance Traveled for Surgery with Short- and Long-Term Cancer Outcomes

Authors: Nabil Wasif, MD, MPH, Yu-Hui Chang, PhD, Barbara A. Pockaj, MD, Richard J. Gray, MD, Amit Mathur, MD, MS, David Etzioni, MD, MS

Published in: Annals of Surgical Oncology | Issue 11/2016

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

The influence of distance traveled for treatment on short- and long-term cancer outcomes is unclear.

Methods

Patients with colon, esophageal, liver, and pancreas cancer from 2003 to 2006 were identified from the National Cancer Data Base (NCDB). Distance traveled for surgical treatment was estimated using zip code centroids. Propensity scores were generated for probability of traveling farther for treatment. Mixed effects logistic regression for 90-day mortality and Cox regression for 5-year mortality were compared between patients treated regionally and those traveling from farther away.

Results

The mean distance traveled for all patients for surgical resection was 30.0 ± 227 miles, with a median distance of 7.5 (interquartile range 14.4) miles. Patients who were aged ≥80 years, on Medicaid, or African American were less likely to be in the fourth quartile of distance (Q4) traveled for surgery. Patients who were in Q4 had a lower risk-adjusted 90-day mortality compared to Q1 for colon [odds ratio (OR) 0.89, 95 % confidence interval (CI) 0.82–0.96], liver (OR 0.49, 95 % CI 0.3–0.78), and pancreatic (OR 0.74, 95 % CI 0.56–0.98) cancer. Similarly, patients in Q4 for all tumor types had a lower risk-adjusted 5-year mortality compared to patients in Q1; colon (hazard ratio (HR) 0.96, 95 % CI 0.93–0.99), esophagus (HR 0.84, 95 % CI 0.75–0.94), liver (HR 0.75, 95 % CI 0.62–0.89), and pancreas (HR 0.87, 95 % CI 0.80–0.95).

Conclusions

Greater travel distance for surgical resection of gastrointestinal cancers is associated with lower 90-day and 5-year mortality outcomes. This distance bias has implications for regionalization and reporting of cancer outcomes.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
go back to reference Ballard DJ, Bryant SC, O’Brien PC, et al. Referral selection bias in the Medicare hospital mortality prediction model: are centers of referral for Medicare beneficiaries necessarily centers of excellence?. Health Serv Res. 1994;28:771–84.PubMedPubMedCentral Ballard DJ, Bryant SC, O’Brien PC, et al. Referral selection bias in the Medicare hospital mortality prediction model: are centers of referral for Medicare beneficiaries necessarily centers of excellence?. Health Serv Res. 1994;28:771–84.PubMedPubMedCentral
2.
go back to reference Etzioni DA, Fowl RJ, Wasif N, et al. Distance bias and surgical outcomes. Med Care. 2013;51:238–44.CrossRefPubMed Etzioni DA, Fowl RJ, Wasif N, et al. Distance bias and surgical outcomes. Med Care. 2013;51:238–44.CrossRefPubMed
3.
go back to reference Lamont EB, Hayreh D, Pickett KE, et al. Is patient travel distance associated with survival on phase II clinical trials in oncology?. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2003;95:1370–5.CrossRefPubMed Lamont EB, Hayreh D, Pickett KE, et al. Is patient travel distance associated with survival on phase II clinical trials in oncology?. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2003;95:1370–5.CrossRefPubMed
4.
go back to reference Lenhard RE Jr, Enterline JP, Crowley J, et al. The effects of distance from primary treatment centers on survival among patients with multiple myeloma. J Clin Oncol. 1987;5:1640–5.PubMed Lenhard RE Jr, Enterline JP, Crowley J, et al. The effects of distance from primary treatment centers on survival among patients with multiple myeloma. J Clin Oncol. 1987;5:1640–5.PubMed
5.
go back to reference Swanson RS, Pezzi CM, Mallin K, et al. The 90-day mortality after pancreatectomy for cancer is double the 30-day mortality: more than 20,000 resections from the National Cancer Data Base. Ann Surg Oncol. 2014;21:4059–67.CrossRefPubMed Swanson RS, Pezzi CM, Mallin K, et al. The 90-day mortality after pancreatectomy for cancer is double the 30-day mortality: more than 20,000 resections from the National Cancer Data Base. Ann Surg Oncol. 2014;21:4059–67.CrossRefPubMed
6.
go back to reference Byrne BE, Mamidanna R, Vincent CA, et al. Population-based cohort study comparing 30- and 90-day institutional mortality rates after colorectal surgery. Br J Surg. 2013;100:1810–7.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Byrne BE, Mamidanna R, Vincent CA, et al. Population-based cohort study comparing 30- and 90-day institutional mortality rates after colorectal surgery. Br J Surg. 2013;100:1810–7.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
7.
go back to reference Onega T, Duell EJ, Shi X, et al. Geographic access to cancer care in the US. Cancer. 2008;112:909–18.CrossRefPubMed Onega T, Duell EJ, Shi X, et al. Geographic access to cancer care in the US. Cancer. 2008;112:909–18.CrossRefPubMed
8.
go back to reference Charlson M, Szatrowski TP, Peterson J, et al. Validation of a combined comorbidity index. J Clin Epidemiol. 1994;47:1245–51.CrossRefPubMed Charlson M, Szatrowski TP, Peterson J, et al. Validation of a combined comorbidity index. J Clin Epidemiol. 1994;47:1245–51.CrossRefPubMed
9.
go back to reference Dehejia RH. Propensity score-matching methods for nonexperimental causal studies. Rev Econ Stat. 2002;84:151–61.CrossRef Dehejia RH. Propensity score-matching methods for nonexperimental causal studies. Rev Econ Stat. 2002;84:151–61.CrossRef
10.
go back to reference Imbens G. The role of the propensity score in estimating dose–response functions. Biometrika. 2000;87:706–10.CrossRef Imbens G. The role of the propensity score in estimating dose–response functions. Biometrika. 2000;87:706–10.CrossRef
11.
go back to reference Etzioni DA, Wasif N, Dueck AC, et al. Association of hospital participation in a surgical outcomes monitoring program with inpatient complications and mortality. JAMA. 2015;313:505–11.CrossRefPubMed Etzioni DA, Wasif N, Dueck AC, et al. Association of hospital participation in a surgical outcomes monitoring program with inpatient complications and mortality. JAMA. 2015;313:505–11.CrossRefPubMed
12.
go back to reference Patlak M, Nass SJ. The role of obesity in cancer survival and recurrence: workshop summary. Washington, DC: National Academies Press; 2012.CrossRef Patlak M, Nass SJ. The role of obesity in cancer survival and recurrence: workshop summary. Washington, DC: National Academies Press; 2012.CrossRef
13.
go back to reference Esnaola NF, Ford ME. Racial differences and disparities in cancer care and outcomes: where’s the rub? Surg Oncol Clin North Am. 2012;21:417–37.CrossRef Esnaola NF, Ford ME. Racial differences and disparities in cancer care and outcomes: where’s the rub? Surg Oncol Clin North Am. 2012;21:417–37.CrossRef
14.
go back to reference Fortney J RK, Warren J. Comparing alternative methods of measuring geographic access to health services. Health Serv Outcomes Res Methodol. 2000;1:173–84.CrossRef Fortney J RK, Warren J. Comparing alternative methods of measuring geographic access to health services. Health Serv Outcomes Res Methodol. 2000;1:173–84.CrossRef
Metadata
Title
Association of Distance Traveled for Surgery with Short- and Long-Term Cancer Outcomes
Authors
Nabil Wasif, MD, MPH
Yu-Hui Chang, PhD
Barbara A. Pockaj, MD
Richard J. Gray, MD
Amit Mathur, MD, MS
David Etzioni, MD, MS
Publication date
01-10-2016
Publisher
Springer International Publishing
Published in
Annals of Surgical Oncology / Issue 11/2016
Print ISSN: 1068-9265
Electronic ISSN: 1534-4681
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-016-5242-z

Other articles of this Issue 11/2016

Annals of Surgical Oncology 11/2016 Go to the issue