旅行距离对接受细胞切除手术和腹腔内热化疗的恶性腹膜间皮瘤患者疗效的影响

Javid Sadjadi, Li Luo, Bridget Fahy, Alissa Greenbaum
{"title":"旅行距离对接受细胞切除手术和腹腔内热化疗的恶性腹膜间皮瘤患者疗效的影响","authors":"Javid Sadjadi,&nbsp;Li Luo,&nbsp;Bridget Fahy,&nbsp;Alissa Greenbaum","doi":"10.1016/j.soi.2024.100110","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>Malignant peritoneal mesothelioma (MPM) is a rare disease with a generally poor prognosis treated with systemic chemotherapy alone. Cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (CRS-HIPEC) can offer improved overall survival in select patients. This study examined the effect of travel distance on oncologic outcomes in patients with MPM undergoing CRS-HIPEC.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>The National Cancer Database (NCDB) was reviewed from 2006 to 2020. The primary variable was distance traveled to CRS-HIPEC facility (&lt;50 miles versus ≥50 miles). Primary outcome was overall survival. Secondary outcomes examined 30- and 90-day post-surgical outcomes.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Overall, 650 patients met inclusion criteria; 345 patients traveled &lt; 50 miles and 305 patients traveled ≥ 50 miles. Rates of MPM were highest in the Northeast, Middle and South Atlantic regions. Patients traveling ≥50 miles were younger, had a lower median income, and were more likely to be privately insured and treated at an academic center. There was no difference in overall survival between groups (p=0.87). Secondary outcomes were comparable: 30-day survival was 98 % in both groups (p=0.9), 90-day survival was 93 % in both groups (p=0.9), 30-day readmission rate was 11 % in the shorter travel distance group versus 7 % (p=0.2). Hospital length of stay (LOS) was longer in the ≥50 miles group (9 vs 8 days; p=0.02).</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>Outcomes following CRS-HIPEC for MPM did not differ based upon distance traveled for treatment, though patients who travel ≥ 50 miles have an increased LOS. Regionalization of CRS-HIPEC for MPM does not result in worse oncologic or surgical outcomes.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":101191,"journal":{"name":"Surgical Oncology Insight","volume":"2 1","pages":"Article 100110"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Effect of travel distance on outcomes of patients with malignant peritoneal mesothelioma treated with cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy\",\"authors\":\"Javid Sadjadi,&nbsp;Li Luo,&nbsp;Bridget Fahy,&nbsp;Alissa Greenbaum\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.soi.2024.100110\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>Malignant peritoneal mesothelioma (MPM) is a rare disease with a generally poor prognosis treated with systemic chemotherapy alone. Cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (CRS-HIPEC) can offer improved overall survival in select patients. This study examined the effect of travel distance on oncologic outcomes in patients with MPM undergoing CRS-HIPEC.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>The National Cancer Database (NCDB) was reviewed from 2006 to 2020. The primary variable was distance traveled to CRS-HIPEC facility (&lt;50 miles versus ≥50 miles). Primary outcome was overall survival. Secondary outcomes examined 30- and 90-day post-surgical outcomes.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Overall, 650 patients met inclusion criteria; 345 patients traveled &lt; 50 miles and 305 patients traveled ≥ 50 miles. Rates of MPM were highest in the Northeast, Middle and South Atlantic regions. Patients traveling ≥50 miles were younger, had a lower median income, and were more likely to be privately insured and treated at an academic center. There was no difference in overall survival between groups (p=0.87). Secondary outcomes were comparable: 30-day survival was 98 % in both groups (p=0.9), 90-day survival was 93 % in both groups (p=0.9), 30-day readmission rate was 11 % in the shorter travel distance group versus 7 % (p=0.2). Hospital length of stay (LOS) was longer in the ≥50 miles group (9 vs 8 days; p=0.02).</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>Outcomes following CRS-HIPEC for MPM did not differ based upon distance traveled for treatment, though patients who travel ≥ 50 miles have an increased LOS. Regionalization of CRS-HIPEC for MPM does not result in worse oncologic or surgical outcomes.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":101191,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Surgical Oncology Insight\",\"volume\":\"2 1\",\"pages\":\"Article 100110\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-31\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Surgical Oncology Insight\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2950247024001191\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Surgical Oncology Insight","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2950247024001191","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景恶性腹膜间皮瘤(MPM)是一种罕见疾病,单靠全身化疗一般预后较差。细胞切除手术和腹腔内热化疗(CRS-HIPEC)可改善部分患者的总生存率。本研究探讨了旅行距离对接受CRS-HIPEC治疗的MPM患者肿瘤预后的影响。主要变量是前往CRS-HIPEC设施的距离(<50英里与≥50英里)。主要结果是总生存率。次要结果为手术后 30 天和 90 天的结果。结果总计有 650 名患者符合纳入标准;345 名患者的旅行距离为 < 50 英里,305 名患者的旅行距离≥ 50 英里。东北部、中部和南大西洋地区的骨髓瘤发病率最高。行程≥50英里的患者更年轻,收入中位数更低,更有可能参加私人保险并在学术中心接受治疗。两组患者的总生存率没有差异(P=0.87)。次要结果具有可比性:两组的 30 天存活率均为 98%(P=0.9),90 天存活率均为 93%(P=0.9),旅行距离较短组的 30 天再入院率为 11%,旅行距离较长组的 30 天再入院率为 7%(P=0.2)。结论MPM患者接受CRS-HIPEC治疗后的疗效并不因治疗距离的远近而不同,但治疗距离≥50英里的患者住院时间会延长。对 MPM 进行 CRS-HIPEC 区域化治疗不会导致更差的肿瘤或手术效果。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Effect of travel distance on outcomes of patients with malignant peritoneal mesothelioma treated with cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy

Background

Malignant peritoneal mesothelioma (MPM) is a rare disease with a generally poor prognosis treated with systemic chemotherapy alone. Cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (CRS-HIPEC) can offer improved overall survival in select patients. This study examined the effect of travel distance on oncologic outcomes in patients with MPM undergoing CRS-HIPEC.

Methods

The National Cancer Database (NCDB) was reviewed from 2006 to 2020. The primary variable was distance traveled to CRS-HIPEC facility (<50 miles versus ≥50 miles). Primary outcome was overall survival. Secondary outcomes examined 30- and 90-day post-surgical outcomes.

Results

Overall, 650 patients met inclusion criteria; 345 patients traveled < 50 miles and 305 patients traveled ≥ 50 miles. Rates of MPM were highest in the Northeast, Middle and South Atlantic regions. Patients traveling ≥50 miles were younger, had a lower median income, and were more likely to be privately insured and treated at an academic center. There was no difference in overall survival between groups (p=0.87). Secondary outcomes were comparable: 30-day survival was 98 % in both groups (p=0.9), 90-day survival was 93 % in both groups (p=0.9), 30-day readmission rate was 11 % in the shorter travel distance group versus 7 % (p=0.2). Hospital length of stay (LOS) was longer in the ≥50 miles group (9 vs 8 days; p=0.02).

Conclusions

Outcomes following CRS-HIPEC for MPM did not differ based upon distance traveled for treatment, though patients who travel ≥ 50 miles have an increased LOS. Regionalization of CRS-HIPEC for MPM does not result in worse oncologic or surgical outcomes.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信