Faculty Bibliography

OBJECTIVE:To evaluate whether the receipt of evidence-based care could mitigate survival disparities among Medicaid recipients and uninsured women with cervical cancer. METHODS:The National Cancer Database was utilized to identify women with cervical cancer treated from 2004 to 2016. Eight quality metrics were determined. Survival outcomes were examined stratified by insurance status and stage. To measure the impact of guideline-concordant care on the mitigation of disparities, we compared survival outcomes of the overall cohort to one that was perfectly adherent to all quality metrics. RESULTS:A total of 103,400 patients were identified; 47.0% of patients had private insurance, 21.5% Medicaid and 9.2% uninsured. Medicaid and uninsured patients were significantly less likely than privately insured patients to receive timely completion of radiation and timely initiation of treatment; uninsured patients were also significantly less likely to receive treatment for locally advanced disease. Medicaid and uninsured patients were also less likely to receive lymph node assessment and primary chemoradiation. Medicaid and uninsured patients had an increased risk of mortality compared to privately insured patients (aHR = 1.36, 95% CI 1.31-1.41 and aHR 1.29, 95% CI 1.23-1.36 respectively). While the receipt of these quality metrics was associated with improved survival, Medicaid and uninsured women who received guideline-concordant care were still at an increased risk of death compared to women with private insurance (aHR = 1.38, 95% CI 1.35-1.49 and aHR = 1.24; 95% CI, 1.16-1.32 respectively). CONCLUSION:Medicaid and uninsured patients were less likely to receive evidence-based care and were at increased risk of mortality at all stages compared to privately insured patients. The receipt of quality care does not eliminate insurance status-based disparities among women with cervical cancer.

PURPOSE:Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a leading cause of perioperative morbidity and mortality. We analyzed the trends in use of VTE prophylaxis over time in women undergoing hysterectomy for both benign and malignant indications. METHODS:The Premier Database was used to identify women who underwent hysterectomy from 2011 to 2017. Women were stratified by indication for surgery (benign or malignant) and route of hysterectomy. VTE prophylaxis was classified as none, mechanical, pharmacologic, or combination (mechanical and pharmacologic). Trends in use of prophylaxis over time were analyzed. Multivariate models were developed to examine predictors of use of prophylaxis. RESULTS:Among 920,477 patients identified, 579,824 (63.0%) received VTE prophylaxis, including 15.4% who received pharmacologic, 34.5% who received mechanical, and 13.1% who received combination prophylaxis. Overall use of prophylaxis declined annually from 68.1% in 2011 to 56.7% in 2017 (P < 0.001). Among patients with cancer, the use of prophylaxis declined from 84.5% in 2011 to 78.6% in 2017 (P < 0.001). A similar trend was noted among women with benign conditions, with rates of prophylaxis declining from 66.2 to 53.3% (P < 0.001). Additionally, use of prophylaxis declined for patients undergoing MIS hysterectomy from 65.4% in 2011 to 53.3% in 2017, and from 73.1 to 66.7% in patients who underwent abdominal hysterectomy. Among patients with cancer, rates of pharmacologic and combined prophylaxis was 70.9% in 2011 and 69.7% in 2017. However, among women with benign conditions, the rates of pharmacologic and combined prophylaxis rose from 19.4% in 2011 to 25.6% in 2017 (P < 0.001). Despite these changes in prophylaxis rates and methods, there was no significant change in the rate of VTE between 2011 and 2017 (P = 0.06). CONCLUSION:Despite the lack of change in guidelines for VTE prophylaxis in gynecologic surgery, the overall rates of prophylaxis decreased over time independent of the indication or route of surgery. The rates of thromboembolic events did not significantly increase in response to the decreased use of VTE prophylaxis.

BACKGROUND:Coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) has spread rapidly around the world to become a global pandemic. There is limited data on the impact of COVID-19 among patients with cancer. METHODS:A systematic review was performed to determine outcomes of adult patients with cancer affected by coronavirus infections, specifically SARS, MERS, and COVID-19. Studies were independently screened by two reviewers and assessed for quality and bias. Outcomes measured included study characteristics, cancer type, phase of care at the time of diagnosis, and clinical presentation. Morbidity and mortality outcomes were analyzed to assess the severity of infection as compared to the general population. RESULTS:A total of 19 studies with 110 patients were included. Of these, 66.4% had COVID-19 infections, 32.7% MERS and only one patient with SARS. The majority of COVID-19 studies were based on studies in China. There was a 56.6% rate of a severe event, including ICU admission or requiring mechanical ventilation, with an overall 44.5% fatality rate. CONCLUSIONS:Patients with cancer with coronavirus infections may be more susceptible to higher morbidity and mortality.

BACKGROUND:Black women experience poorer survival compared with white women across all endometrial cancer stages and histologies. The incidence of endometrial cancer is 30% lower in black women compared with white women, yet mortality is 80% higher in black women. Differences in adherence to evidence-based guidelines have been proposed to be major contributors to this disparity. OBJECTIVES:We examined whether adherence to evidence-based treatment recommendations for endometrial cancer could mitigate survival disparities between black and white women. STUDY DESIGN:The National Cancer Database was used to identify women with endometrial cancer treated from 2004 through 2016. We established 5 evidence-based quality metrics based on review of primary literature and accepted guidelines: surgical treatment within 6 weeks of diagnosis (Q1), use of minimally invasive surgery (stage I-IIIC; Q2), pelvic nodal assessment (high-risk tumors; Q3), adjuvant radiation (high intermediate risk; Q4), and systemic chemotherapy (stage III-IV; Q5). The rates of 30 and 90 day mortality and 5 year survival were compared between black and white women. To determine the influence of quality on outcomes, we compared outcomes among perfectly adherent black and white women with stage I and III endometrial cancer. RESULTS:We identified 310,208 women including 35,035 (11.3%) black women and 275,173 (88.3%) white women. Black women were less likely than white women to receive Q1 (65.8 vs 75.6%), Q2 (58.5 vs 72.9%), Q3 (71.3 vs 74.2%), and Q5 (72.7 vs 73.2%) (P < .05 for all). Adherence to each quality metrics was associated with improved survival. Among women with stage I disease, perfect adherence to the relative quality metrics was seen in 53.1% of white and 41.5% of black women. Among perfectly adherent stage I patients, outcomes in black women improved relative to unselected black women; however, they still experienced higher risk of 30 day (adjusted relative risk, 2.25; 95% confidence interval, 1.30-3.90), 90 day (adjusted relative risk, 1.84; 95% confidence interval, 1.23-2.76), and 5 year mortality (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.42; 95% confidence interval, 1.26-1.59) compared with similar white women. Among women with stage III tumors, perfect adherence to the relative quality metrics was seen in 56.6% of white and 44.1% of black women. Perfectly adherent black women with stage III disease had improved outcomes but remained at increased risk of 30 day (adjusted relative risk, 1.86; 95% confidence interval, 1.01-3.44) and 5 year mortality (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.35; 95% confidence interval, 1.22-1.50) compared with white women. CONCLUSION:Black women are less likely than white women with endometrial cancer to receive evidence-based care. However, receipt of evidence-based care mitigates but does not eliminate racial disparities in outcomes and black women remain at greater risk of death from endometrial cancer.

OBJECTIVE:To examine patterns of patient travel among women with ovarian cancer and to explore the association between travel distance and short and long-term outcomes. METHODS:Women with stage II-IV epithelial ovarian cancer diagnosed from 2004 to 2016 who underwent primary surgery were identified in the National Cancer Database. Mixed-effect log-linear models and proportional hazards models were developed to evaluate the association between travel distance and short and long-term outcomes after propensity score weighting. A further analysis was performed to compare patients who traveled a short distance to a low volume center (Local) to patients who traveled farther to a high volume hospital (Travel). RESULTS:We identified 56,834 patients treated in 1201 hospitals. Hispanic women were 58% and black women 64% less likely than white women to travel to a center in the greatest distance quartile for care. Similarly, Medicaid recipients (vs. commercially insured) were less likely to travel to a quartile four hospital (compared to Q1 of distance traveled). Of all patients, 90-day mortality was significantly lower in patients who traveled farther (Q4 vs. Q1; P < 0.0001). Compared to women in the Local group, patients in the Travel group had a decreased 30-day readmission rate. There was no difference in 30-day, 90-day, or 5-year mortality when comparing the Local to the Travel group. CONCLUSIONS:Travel distance for ovarian cancer surgery has increased over time. While there may be some short-term benefits in traveling to a regional center for care, there was little difference in long term outcomes based on travel distance.

OBJECTIVE:To examine the risk of nodal metastases in a contemporary cohort of women based on pathologic risk factors including histology, depth of invasion, tumor grade, and lymphovascular space invasion. METHODS:Women with endometrial cancer who underwent hysterectomy from 2004 to 2016 who were registered in the National Cancer Database were analyzed. Patients were stratified by T stage: T1A (<50% myometrial invasion), T1B (>50% myometrial invasion) and T2 (cervical involvement). Lymph node metastases were assessed in relation to tumor T stage and grade, and further stratified by lymphovascular space invasion. RESULTS:We identified 161,960 patients. The rate of nodal metastases within the endometrioid histology cohort was 2.2% for T1A cancers, 12.8% for T1B cancers and 19.9% for T2 cancers. For stage TIA cancers, the percent of patients with positive nodes increased from 1.1% for grade 1 cancers, to 2.9% for grade 2 cancers to 4.8% for grade 3 cancers. The corresponding rates of nodal metastases for stage T1B cancers were 8.6%, 13.7%, and 16.9%, respectively. For T1A cancers without lymphovascular space invasion, nodal metastases ranged from 0.6% in those with grade 1 cancers to 3.0% for grade 3 cancers. The corresponding risk of nodal disease ranged from 11.8% to 13.9% for T1A cancers with lymphovascular space invasion. CONCLUSIONS:There was a sequential increase in the risk of lymph node metastases based on depth of uterine invasion, tumor grade, and the presence of lymphovascular space invasion. The overall rate of nodal metastasis is lower than reported in the original GOG 33.

BACKGROUND:Complex oncologic surgeries, including those for endometrial cancer, increasingly have been concentrated to greater-volume centers, owing to previous research that has demonstrated associations between greater surgical volume and improved outcomes. There is a potential for concentration of care to have unwanted consequences, including cost burden, delayed treatment, patient dissatisfaction, and possibly worse clinical outcomes, especially for more vulnerable populations. OBJECTIVE:To describe changes in site of care for patients with endometrial cancer in New York State and to determine whether the distance women traveled for hysterectomy has changed over time. STUDY DESIGN:We used the New York Statewide Planning and Research Cooperative System to identify women with endometrial cancer who underwent hysterectomy from 2000 to 2014. Demographic and clinical data as well as hospital data were collected. Trends in travel distance (straight-line distance) were analyzed within all hospital referral regions and differences in travel distance over times and across sociodemographic characteristics analyzed. RESULTS:We identified 41,179 subjects. The number of hospitals and surgeons performing hysterectomy decreased across all hospital referral regions over time. The decline in the number of hospitals caring for women with endometrial cancer ranged from -16.7% in Syracuse (12 to 10 hospitals) to -76.5% in Rochester (17 to 4 hospitals). Similarly, the percentage of surgeons within a given hospital referral region operating on women declined from -45.2% in Buffalo (84-46 surgeons) to -77.8% in Albany (72 to 16 surgeons). The median distance to the index hospital for patients increased in all Hospital Referral Regions. For residents in Binghamton, median travel distance increased by 46.9 miles (95% confidence interval, 33.8-60.0) whereas distance increased in Elmira by 19.7 miles (95% confidence interval, 7.3-32.1) and by 12.4 miles (95% confidence interval, 6.4-18.4) in Albany. For residents of Binghamton and Albany, there was a greater than 100% increase in distance traveled over the 15-year time period, with increases of 551.8% (46.9 miles; 95% confidence interval, 33.8-60.0 miles) and 102.5% (12.4 miles; 95% confidence interval, 6.4-18.4 miles), respectively. Travel distance increased for all races and regardless of insurance status but was greatest for white patients and those with private insurance (P<.0001 for both). CONCLUSION:The number of surgeons and hospitals caring for women with endometrial cancer in New York State has decreased, whereas the distance that patients travel to receive care has increased over time.

OBJECTIVE:To identify use and outcomes of simple hysterectomy compared with radical hysterectomy for women with early-stage cervical cancer. METHODS:The National Cancer Database was used to review the cases of women with stage IA2 and IB1 (2 cm or less) cervical cancer from 2004 to 2015. Patients were classified based on whether they underwent simple or radical hysterectomy. Survival was examined after propensity score weighting. RESULTS:Simple hysterectomy was performed in 44.6% of women with stage IA2 (n=1,530) and 35.3% of those with stage IB1 (n=3,931) tumors. Rates of simple hysterectomy increased from 37.8% to 52.7% from 2004 to 2014 for stage IA2 cancers and from 29.7% to 43.8% between 2004 and 2013 for stage IB1 cancers. For stage IA2 cancers, younger women and those treated at an academic medical center were less likely to undergo simple hysterectomy. For stage IB1 cancers, black women were more likely to undergo simple hysterectomy, and those treated at an academic medical center were less likely to undergo simple hysterectomy. After propensity score weighting, there was no association between route of hysterectomy and survival for stage IA2 cancers (hazard ratio [HR] 0.70, 95% CI 0.41-1.20, 5-year survival 95.1% for radical hysterectomy vs 97.6% for simple hysterectomy). For stage IB1 cancers, patients who underwent simple hysterectomy were at 55% increased risk of death (HR 1.55, 95% CI 1.18-2.03, and 5-year survival was 95.3% for radical hysterectomy vs 92.4% for simple hysterectomy). CONCLUSION:Although there was no association between surgical radicality and survival for women with stage IA2 tumors, there was a 55% increase in mortality for women with stage IB1 neoplasms who underwent simple compared with radical hysterectomy. Radical hysterectomy is the treatment of choice for women with stage IB1 cervical cancer.

OBJECTIVE:Neuroendocrine carcinoma of the endometrium (NECE) is a rare malignancy. We examined the natural history and outcomes of women with NECE compared to patients with poorly differentiated endometrioid endometrial cancer (EC). METHODS:The National Cancer Database (NCDB) was used to identify women with NECE and women with poorly differentiated EC from 2004 to 2015. Clinical, demographic, and treatment characteristics were compared between groups. Kaplan-Meier survival curves and multivariable Cox proportional hazard regression models were used to identify associations between tumor histology and survival. RESULTS:A total of 28,291 women with EC and 364 women with NECE were identified. Patients with NECE were more often non-white and presented with later stage disease compared to patients with EC. Women with NECE were more likely to receive adjuvant chemotherapy (60.2% vs. 29.6%), but were less likely to receive radiation (28.0% vs. 47.6%) (P < 0.001 for both). Median survival was 17 months (95% CI, 12-23) for NECE and 144 months (95% CI, 140-148) for EC. 5-year survival was 38.3% (95% CI, 32.7-43.8%) for NECE vs. 68.8% (95% CI, 68.2-69.4%) for EC. In a multivariable model, the hazard ratio for death for women with NECE compared to EC was 2.32 (95% CI, 1.88-2.88). Similar findings were noted when the analysis was limited to women with stage I (HR = 1.62; 95% CI, 1.01-2.61), and stage III (HR = 2.57; 95% CI, 1.88-3.53) neoplasms. CONCLUSIONS:NECE is a rare and aggressive uterine carcinoma. Compared to patients with poorly differentiated EC, patients with NECE present with later stage disease and have decreased survival.