1209

ASSOCIATION OF FRAGMENTATION OF CANCER CARE WITH SURVIVAL IN HEPATOCELLULAR CARCINOMA

Date
May 21, 2024
Explore related products in the following collection:

Introduction
Fragmentation of care (FC) refers to healthcare that is delivered by various providers and/or facilities. This has been linked to inferior outcomes, yet it increases access to specialized cancer care. The primary objective was to investigate the association of FC for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) with survival.

Methods
In this retrospective cohort study, adults diagnosed with HCC from January 2007 to December 2017 were identified using the California Cancer Registry. Facility-related information for each patient visit was linked to the California Healthcare Access and Information database. FC was measured by: (1) the quantity of healthcare facilities a patient visited within two years after diagnosis and (2) the “directionality” of transitions of care between cancer-designated facilities (National Comprehensive Cancer Network [NCCN] or National Cancer Institute [NCI]) and non-designated facilities. Baseline demographic, cancer-specific, and facility-specific data were collected. The association of FC quantity and directionality with survival was determined using multivariable Cox regression analyses with FC expressed as a time-varying covariate.

Results
Of 10,825 eligible patients, 5,047(46.6%) received unfragmented care, 3,679(34.0%) received care at 2 facilities, 1,448(13.4%) received care at 3 facilities, and 651(6.0%) received care at 4 or more facilities. Using Cox regression, increasing FC quantity was associated with higher mortality (2 facilities: HR:1.65, 95% CI:(1.56,1.75), p<0.001; 3 facilities: HR:2.21, 95% CI:(2.02,2.41), p<0.001; 4+ facilities: HR:2.66, 95% CI:(2.35,3.02), p<0.001) (Figure 1). The FC directionality model showed that compared to unfragmented designated care all other care direction types were associated with higher mortality (unfragmented non-designated care: HR:1.47, 95% CI:(1.34,1.61); non-designated to designated care: HR:1.74, 95% CI:(1.55,1.95); designated to designated care: HR:2.27, 95% CI:(1.82,2.84); designated to non-designated care: HR:2.61, 95% CI:(2.32,2.95); undesignated to undesignated care: HR:2.61, 95% CI:(2.37,2.87), all p<0.001), Figure 2). Fragmentation of care was associated with poor outcomes irrespective of the directionality of care transition. Specifically, transition of care from a non-designated to a designated center was associated with poorer outcomes (HR:1.74, p<0.001) than non-fragmented care at an undesignated center (HR:1.47, p<0.001) (Figure 2).

Conclusion
FC is associated with mortality in HCC patients and worsens as the number of facilities increases. “Upgrading care” from a non-designated center to an NCCN/NCI center does not appear to overcome the detriment associated with fragmentation of care in outcomes. This requires further investigation because it contradicts the dogma that referral to specialized centers after cancer diagnosis is associated with improved outcomes.
Figure 1. Multivariable time-varying covariate Cox regression of the association of fragmented care quantity (number of facilities visited) with survival in patient hepatocellular carcinoma

Figure 1. Multivariable time-varying covariate Cox regression of the association of fragmented care quantity (number of facilities visited) with survival in patient hepatocellular carcinoma

Figure 2. Multivariable time-varying covariate Cox regression of the association of fragmented care directionality (transitioning care between cancer designated and non-cancer designated facilities) and survival in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma

Figure 2. Multivariable time-varying covariate Cox regression of the association of fragmented care directionality (transitioning care between cancer designated and non-cancer designated facilities) and survival in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma


Tracks

Related Products

Thumbnail for Residents & Fellows Research Conference
Residents & Fellows Research Conference
RISK FACTORS FOR REGROWTH AFTER NONOPERATIVE MANAGEMENT FOR RECTAL CANCER
Thumbnail for LAPAROSCOPIC TOTAL PANCREATECTOMY AFTER LAPAROSCOPIC WHIPPLE FOR PANCREATIC DUCTAL ADENOCARCINOMA
LAPAROSCOPIC TOTAL PANCREATECTOMY AFTER LAPAROSCOPIC WHIPPLE FOR PANCREATIC DUCTAL ADENOCARCINOMA
Improvements in systemic therapy may increase rate of 2nd novo PDAC after prior PDAC
Thumbnail for ROBOTIC ANATOMICAL RIGHT HEPATECTOMY FOR NECROTIC CHOLANGIOCARCINOMA
TECHNIQUE OF INFLOW CONTROL IN NAKAMURA TYPE B PORTAL VEIN ANATOMY
ROBOTIC ANATOMICAL RIGHT HEPATECTOMY FOR NECROTIC CHOLANGIOCARCINOMA TECHNIQUE OF INFLOW CONTROL IN NAKAMURA TYPE B PORTAL VEIN ANATOMY
Anatomical variations in the inflow vasculatures must be anticipated in any anatomical hepatectomy to avoid complications. Nakamura Type B portal vein (PV) anatomy requires individual isolation of right anterior and posterior PV to avoid narrowing of the left PV…