TY - JOUR
T1 - Greater travel distance to specialized facilities is associated with higher survival for patients with soft-tissue sarcoma
T2 - US nationwide patterns
AU - Fujiwara, Tomohiro
AU - Ogura, Koichi
AU - Healey, John
N1 - Funding Information:
The institution of one or more of the authors (J. Healey) has received funding from the National Institutes of Health/National Cancer Institute Cancer Center Support Grant, P30 CA008748. The institution of one or more of the authors (T. Fujiwara) has received a grant-in-aid for overseas research fellowships from the Yasuda Medical Foundation (2018), and a grant-in-aid for overseas research fellowships from the Japan Society for the Promotion of Science (201860336). The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2021 Fujiwara et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
PY - 2021/6
Y1 - 2021/6
N2 - Purpose The survival impact of geographic access to specialized care remains unknown in patients with soft-tissue sarcomas (STS). This study aimed to clarify the association between the patient travel distance and survival outcome and investigate the factors lying behind it. Methods A total of 34 528 patients with STS registered in the National Cancer Data Base, diagnosed from 2004-2016, were investigated. Results Tumor stage correlated with travel distance: patients with metastatic disease stayed closer to home. However, the type of facility showed greatest variation: 37.0%, 51.0%, 73.5%, and 75.9% of patients with ?10 miles, 10.1-50 miles, 50.1-100 miles, and >100 miles, respectively (P<0.001), had a sarcoma care at academic/research centers. On a multivariable analysis, reduced mortality risk was associated with longer (versus short) travel distance (>100 miles: HR = 0.877; P = 0.001) and management at academic/research (versus nonacademic/ research) centers (HR = 0.857; P<0.001). The greatest divergence was seen in patients traveling very long distance (>100 miles) to an academic/research center, with a 26.9% survival benefit (HR = 0.731; P<0.001), compared with those traveling short distance (?10 miles; 95.4% living in metropolitan area) to a non-academic/research center. There was no significant correlation between travel distance and survival in patients who had care at academic/research centers, whereas a survival benefit of management at academic/ research centers was observed in every group of travel distance, regardless of tumor stage. Conclusions This national study demonstrated that increased travel distance was associated with superior survival, attributable to a higher proportion of patients receiving sarcoma care at distant academic/research centers. These data support centralized care for STS. Overcoming referral and travel barriers may enable more patients to be treated at specialized centers and may further improve survival rates for patients with STS, even when it imposes an increased travel burden.
AB - Purpose The survival impact of geographic access to specialized care remains unknown in patients with soft-tissue sarcomas (STS). This study aimed to clarify the association between the patient travel distance and survival outcome and investigate the factors lying behind it. Methods A total of 34 528 patients with STS registered in the National Cancer Data Base, diagnosed from 2004-2016, were investigated. Results Tumor stage correlated with travel distance: patients with metastatic disease stayed closer to home. However, the type of facility showed greatest variation: 37.0%, 51.0%, 73.5%, and 75.9% of patients with ?10 miles, 10.1-50 miles, 50.1-100 miles, and >100 miles, respectively (P<0.001), had a sarcoma care at academic/research centers. On a multivariable analysis, reduced mortality risk was associated with longer (versus short) travel distance (>100 miles: HR = 0.877; P = 0.001) and management at academic/research (versus nonacademic/ research) centers (HR = 0.857; P<0.001). The greatest divergence was seen in patients traveling very long distance (>100 miles) to an academic/research center, with a 26.9% survival benefit (HR = 0.731; P<0.001), compared with those traveling short distance (?10 miles; 95.4% living in metropolitan area) to a non-academic/research center. There was no significant correlation between travel distance and survival in patients who had care at academic/research centers, whereas a survival benefit of management at academic/ research centers was observed in every group of travel distance, regardless of tumor stage. Conclusions This national study demonstrated that increased travel distance was associated with superior survival, attributable to a higher proportion of patients receiving sarcoma care at distant academic/research centers. These data support centralized care for STS. Overcoming referral and travel barriers may enable more patients to be treated at specialized centers and may further improve survival rates for patients with STS, even when it imposes an increased travel burden.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85107366129&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85107366129&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1371/journal.pone.0252381
DO - 10.1371/journal.pone.0252381
M3 - Article
C2 - 34086725
AN - SCOPUS:85107366129
VL - 16
JO - PLoS One
JF - PLoS One
SN - 1932-6203
IS - 6 June
M1 - e0252381
ER -
