Aaron Gazendam, Liuzhe Zhang, David Clever, Anthony Griffin, Jay Wunder, Peter Ferguson, Kim M Tsoi
{"title":"Travel distance to tertiary sarcoma centres does not influence oncological presentation or outcomes.","authors":"Aaron Gazendam, Liuzhe Zhang, David Clever, Anthony Griffin, Jay Wunder, Peter Ferguson, Kim M Tsoi","doi":"10.1302/0301-620X.107B3.BJJ-2024-0488.R1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Aims: </strong>Soft-tissue sarcomas (STSs) are rare cancers with centralized care advocated to consolidate resources and expertise. However, geographical challenges, particularly in countries like Canada, can increase travel distances for patients. The impact of travel distance on sarcoma presentation and outcomes remains unclear, particularly in single-payer healthcare systems with centralized care.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A retrospective cohort analysis was conducted on 1,570 patients with STS who underwent surgical resection at a Canadian tertiary referral centre between January 2010 and January 2021. Patients were divided into those living ≤ 50 km and > 50 km from the centre. Demographics, tumour characteristics, treatment methods, and survival outcomes were analyzed. A Cox regression model was constructed to evaluate predictors of overall survival.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Patients living > 50 km from the centre (n = 700) travelled a mean of 176 km (SD 250), while those ≤ 50 km (n = 870) travelled a mean of 24.8 km (SD 13.8). There were no significant differences in disease presentation, time to definitive treatment, use of systemic therapies, or functional outcomes between the two groups. The two-year and five-year overall survival rates were similar between the groups (83.1% (95% CI 80.1% to 86.1%) vs 83.8% (95% CI 81.8% to 85.8%) and 72.1% (95% CI 69.1% to 75.1%) vs 72.5% (95% CI 69.5% to 75.5%), respectively). The regression model demonstrated that age, higher tumour grade, depth, and lower income were predictive of worse overall survival, while distance travelled was not an independent predictor of survival.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Contrary to previous studies, our findings suggest that travel distance did not influence disease presentation or survival outcomes in STS patients treated at a centralized sarcoma centre. This challenges previous notions regarding the impact of travel distance on cancer outcomes, and supports the effectiveness of centralized care models, even in geographically vast regions.</p>","PeriodicalId":48944,"journal":{"name":"Bone & Joint Journal","volume":"107-B 3","pages":"368-372"},"PeriodicalIF":4.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Bone & Joint Journal","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1302/0301-620X.107B3.BJJ-2024-0488.R1","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Aims: Soft-tissue sarcomas (STSs) are rare cancers with centralized care advocated to consolidate resources and expertise. However, geographical challenges, particularly in countries like Canada, can increase travel distances for patients. The impact of travel distance on sarcoma presentation and outcomes remains unclear, particularly in single-payer healthcare systems with centralized care.
Methods: A retrospective cohort analysis was conducted on 1,570 patients with STS who underwent surgical resection at a Canadian tertiary referral centre between January 2010 and January 2021. Patients were divided into those living ≤ 50 km and > 50 km from the centre. Demographics, tumour characteristics, treatment methods, and survival outcomes were analyzed. A Cox regression model was constructed to evaluate predictors of overall survival.
Results: Patients living > 50 km from the centre (n = 700) travelled a mean of 176 km (SD 250), while those ≤ 50 km (n = 870) travelled a mean of 24.8 km (SD 13.8). There were no significant differences in disease presentation, time to definitive treatment, use of systemic therapies, or functional outcomes between the two groups. The two-year and five-year overall survival rates were similar between the groups (83.1% (95% CI 80.1% to 86.1%) vs 83.8% (95% CI 81.8% to 85.8%) and 72.1% (95% CI 69.1% to 75.1%) vs 72.5% (95% CI 69.5% to 75.5%), respectively). The regression model demonstrated that age, higher tumour grade, depth, and lower income were predictive of worse overall survival, while distance travelled was not an independent predictor of survival.
Conclusion: Contrary to previous studies, our findings suggest that travel distance did not influence disease presentation or survival outcomes in STS patients treated at a centralized sarcoma centre. This challenges previous notions regarding the impact of travel distance on cancer outcomes, and supports the effectiveness of centralized care models, even in geographically vast regions.
期刊介绍:
We welcome original articles from any part of the world. The papers are assessed by members of the Editorial Board and our international panel of expert reviewers, then either accepted for publication or rejected by the Editor. We receive over 2000 submissions each year and accept about 250 for publication, many after revisions recommended by the reviewers, editors or statistical advisers. A decision usually takes between six and eight weeks. Each paper is assessed by two reviewers with a special interest in the subject covered by the paper, and also by members of the editorial team. Controversial papers will be discussed at a full meeting of the Editorial Board. Publication is between four and six months after acceptance.