Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26972644›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics2016

Association Between Geographic Access to Cancer Care and Receipt of Radiation Therapy for Rectal Cancer.

Chun Chieh Lin, Suanna S Bruinooge, M Kelsey Kirkwood, Dawn L Hershman, Ahmedin Jemal, B Ashleigh Guadagnolo, James B Yu, Shane Hopkins, Michael Goldstein, Dean Bajorin and 6 more

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 58 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
58citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.6field-weighted citation impact, top 8% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

58 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 104 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Analysis of travel burden and travel support among patients treated at a comprehensive cancer center in the Southeastern United States.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2024
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. [Cross-sectoral care trajectories of patients with colorectal cancer in Saxony-Anhalt].Gesundheitswesen (Bundesverband der Arzte des Offentlichen Gesundheitsdienstes (Germany)) · 2024
    Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

16 authors at 11 institutions in 1 country.

Chun Chieh LinAmerican Cancer Society, Atlanta, Georgia. Electronic address: anna.lin@cancer.org.
Suanna S BruinoogeAmerican Society of Clinical Oncology, Alexandria, Virginia.
M Kelsey KirkwoodAmerican Society of Clinical Oncology, Alexandria, Virginia.
Dawn L HershmanColumbia University Medical Center, New York, New York.
Ahmedin JemalAmerican Cancer Society, Atlanta, Georgia.
B Ashleigh GuadagnoloMD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas.
James B YuYale University School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut.
Shane HopkinsWilliam R. Bliss Cancer Center, Ames, Iowa.
Michael GoldsteinBeth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, Massachusetts.
Dean BajorinMemorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York.
Sharon H GiordanoMD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas.
Michael KostyScripps Clinic, San Diego, California.
Anna ArnoneAmerican Society for Radiation Oncology, Fairfax, Virginia.
Amy HanleyAmerican Society of Clinical Oncology, Alexandria, Virginia.
Stephanie StevensAmerican Society for Radiation Oncology, Fairfax, Virginia.
Christine OlsenMassachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts.
American Society of Clinical Oncology · USAmerican Cancer Society · USAmerican Society for Radiation Oncology · USThe University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center · USAmes National Laboratory · USBeth Israel Deaconess Medical Center · USColumbia University Irving Medical Center · USMassachusetts General Hospital · USMemorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center · USScripps Clinic · USYale University · US

Funding

X-RAY CRYSTALLOGRAPHYP30CA008748 · NCI · SLOAN-KETTERING INSTITUTE FOR CANCER RES · PI Nicholas D Socci · 1985 to 2026
$347.4M
NCI NIH HHS P30 CA008748
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTrimodality therapy (chemoradiation and surgery) is the standard of care for stage II/III rectal cancer but nearly one third of patients do not receive radiation therapy (RT). We examined the relationship between the density of radiation oncologists and the travel distance to receipt of RT. METHODS AND MATERIALS: A retrospective study based on the National Cancer Data Base identified 26,845 patients aged 18 to 80 years with stage II/III rectal cancer diagnosed from 2007 to 2010. Radiation oncologists were identified through the Physician Compare dataset. Generalized estimating equations clustering by hospital service area was used to examine the association between geographic access and receipt of RT, controlling for patient sociodemographic and clinical characteristics.

resultsOf the 26,845 patients, 70% received RT within 180 days of diagnosis or within 90 days of surgery. Compared with a travel distance of <12.5 miles, patients diagnosed at a reporting facility who traveled ≥50 miles had a decreased likelihood of receipt of RT (50-249 miles, adjusted odds ratio 0.75, P<.001; ≥250 miles, adjusted odds ratio 0.46; P=.002), all else being equal. The density level of radiation oncologists was not significantly associated with the receipt of RT. Patients who were female, nonwhite, and aged ≥50 years and had comorbidities were less likely to receive RT (P<.05). Patients who were uninsured but self-paid for their medical services, initially diagnosed elsewhere but treated at a reporting facility, and resided in Midwest had an increased the likelihood of receipt of RT (P<.05).

conclusionsAn increased travel burden was associated with a decreased likelihood of receiving RT for patients with stage II/III rectal cancer, all else being equal; however, radiation oncologist density was not. Further research of geographic access and establishing transportation assistance programs or lodging services for patients with an unmet need might help decrease geographic barriers and improve the quality of rectal cancer care.

Indexed as

Radiation OncologyAdultAgedAged, 80 and overFemaleHealth Services AccessibilityHumansInsurance, HealthMaleMiddle AgedRectal NeoplasmsRetrospective StudiesTravelUnited StatesWorkforce

Identifiers

PMID26972644
PMCPMC5024783
OpenAlexW2221026680

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.