Keaton A Rummel, Christopher L Hallemeier, Zhaohui Jin, Kenneth W Merrell, Hao Xie, Kellie L Mathis, Nicholas P McKenna, Mark R Waddle, Michael G Haddock, Cameron M Callaghan, Krishan R Jethwa
{"title":"患者、疾病和健康的社会决定因素对直肠腺癌患者接受非手术治疗的影响","authors":"Keaton A Rummel, Christopher L Hallemeier, Zhaohui Jin, Kenneth W Merrell, Hao Xie, Kellie L Mathis, Nicholas P McKenna, Mark R Waddle, Michael G Haddock, Cameron M Callaghan, Krishan R Jethwa","doi":"10.1097/COC.0000000000001243","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>For locally advanced rectal adenocarcinoma (R-ACA), a nonoperative management (NOM) approach has emerged as a guideline-supported treatment option. However, the variables associated with NOM receipt are unknown.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Utilizing the National Cancer Database, we performed a retrospective cohort study of adults with stage 1 to 3 R-ACA managed with curative intent from 2004 to 2018. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients receiving NOM versus surgery. The secondary outcome was survival among NOM patients.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 128,297 patients were included. In all, 115,888 (90.3%) received surgery and 12,409 (9.7%) received NOM. Receipt of NOM was associated with age above 70, Charlson-Deyo score of 0, race (Black, Asian or Pacific Islander, or other vs. White), insurance status, geographical region, treatment in a community facility, year of diagnosis (2012-2018 vs. 2004-2011), tumor grade 1 versus ≥ 2, clinical T-stage ≥ 2, and clinical N1 or N2 versus N0. In the NOM cohort, poorer overall survival was associated with age 70 and above, male sex, Charlson-Deyo score ≥ 1, insurance status, geographical region, rural urban density versus metro/urban, treatment in a community facility, year of diagnosis (2004-2011 vs. 2012-2018), clinical T4 versus T1, clinical N1 or N2 versus N0, grade 3 versus 1, treatment with a radiotherapy dose <45 Gy versus 45 to 54 Gy, and omission of chemotherapy.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Several demographic factors and social determinants of health were associated with receipt of NOM and overall survival. With the increasing utilization of NOM, it will be important to understand the drivers of treatment decisions and influences on access to the desired treatment approach.</p>","PeriodicalId":50812,"journal":{"name":"American Journal of Clinical Oncology-Cancer Clinical Trials","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Impact of Patient, Disease, and Social Determinants of Health on Receipt of Nonoperative Management for Patients With Rectal Adenocarcinoma.\",\"authors\":\"Keaton A Rummel, Christopher L Hallemeier, Zhaohui Jin, Kenneth W Merrell, Hao Xie, Kellie L Mathis, Nicholas P McKenna, Mark R Waddle, Michael G Haddock, Cameron M Callaghan, Krishan R Jethwa\",\"doi\":\"10.1097/COC.0000000000001243\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>For locally advanced rectal adenocarcinoma (R-ACA), a nonoperative management (NOM) approach has emerged as a guideline-supported treatment option. However, the variables associated with NOM receipt are unknown.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Utilizing the National Cancer Database, we performed a retrospective cohort study of adults with stage 1 to 3 R-ACA managed with curative intent from 2004 to 2018. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients receiving NOM versus surgery. The secondary outcome was survival among NOM patients.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 128,297 patients were included. In all, 115,888 (90.3%) received surgery and 12,409 (9.7%) received NOM. Receipt of NOM was associated with age above 70, Charlson-Deyo score of 0, race (Black, Asian or Pacific Islander, or other vs. White), insurance status, geographical region, treatment in a community facility, year of diagnosis (2012-2018 vs. 2004-2011), tumor grade 1 versus ≥ 2, clinical T-stage ≥ 2, and clinical N1 or N2 versus N0. In the NOM cohort, poorer overall survival was associated with age 70 and above, male sex, Charlson-Deyo score ≥ 1, insurance status, geographical region, rural urban density versus metro/urban, treatment in a community facility, year of diagnosis (2004-2011 vs. 2012-2018), clinical T4 versus T1, clinical N1 or N2 versus N0, grade 3 versus 1, treatment with a radiotherapy dose <45 Gy versus 45 to 54 Gy, and omission of chemotherapy.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Several demographic factors and social determinants of health were associated with receipt of NOM and overall survival. With the increasing utilization of NOM, it will be important to understand the drivers of treatment decisions and influences on access to the desired treatment approach.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":50812,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"American Journal of Clinical Oncology-Cancer Clinical Trials\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-09-22\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"American Journal of Clinical Oncology-Cancer Clinical Trials\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1097/COC.0000000000001243\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"ONCOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American Journal of Clinical Oncology-Cancer Clinical Trials","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/COC.0000000000001243","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
The Impact of Patient, Disease, and Social Determinants of Health on Receipt of Nonoperative Management for Patients With Rectal Adenocarcinoma.
Objectives: For locally advanced rectal adenocarcinoma (R-ACA), a nonoperative management (NOM) approach has emerged as a guideline-supported treatment option. However, the variables associated with NOM receipt are unknown.
Methods: Utilizing the National Cancer Database, we performed a retrospective cohort study of adults with stage 1 to 3 R-ACA managed with curative intent from 2004 to 2018. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients receiving NOM versus surgery. The secondary outcome was survival among NOM patients.
Results: A total of 128,297 patients were included. In all, 115,888 (90.3%) received surgery and 12,409 (9.7%) received NOM. Receipt of NOM was associated with age above 70, Charlson-Deyo score of 0, race (Black, Asian or Pacific Islander, or other vs. White), insurance status, geographical region, treatment in a community facility, year of diagnosis (2012-2018 vs. 2004-2011), tumor grade 1 versus ≥ 2, clinical T-stage ≥ 2, and clinical N1 or N2 versus N0. In the NOM cohort, poorer overall survival was associated with age 70 and above, male sex, Charlson-Deyo score ≥ 1, insurance status, geographical region, rural urban density versus metro/urban, treatment in a community facility, year of diagnosis (2004-2011 vs. 2012-2018), clinical T4 versus T1, clinical N1 or N2 versus N0, grade 3 versus 1, treatment with a radiotherapy dose <45 Gy versus 45 to 54 Gy, and omission of chemotherapy.
Conclusions: Several demographic factors and social determinants of health were associated with receipt of NOM and overall survival. With the increasing utilization of NOM, it will be important to understand the drivers of treatment decisions and influences on access to the desired treatment approach.
期刊介绍:
American Journal of Clinical Oncology is a multidisciplinary journal for cancer surgeons, radiation oncologists, medical oncologists, GYN oncologists, and pediatric oncologists.
The emphasis of AJCO is on combined modality multidisciplinary loco-regional management of cancer. The journal also gives emphasis to translational research, outcome studies, and cost utility analyses, and includes opinion pieces and review articles.
The editorial board includes a large number of distinguished surgeons, radiation oncologists, medical oncologists, GYN oncologists, pediatric oncologists, and others who are internationally recognized for expertise in their fields.