ObjectiveA systematic review and meta-analysis to investigate the efficacy of interventions incorporating motivational interviewing for smoking cessation and identify correlates of treatment ...effectsData sourcesMedline/PubMed, PsycInfo and other sources including grey literatureStudy selectionTitle/abstract search terms were motivational interview* OR motivational enhancement AND smok*, cigarette*, tobacco, OR nicotine. Randomised trials reporting number of smokers abstinent at follow up were eligible.Data extractionData were independently coded by the first and third authors. We coded for a variety of study, participant, and intervention related variables.Data synthesisA random effects logistic regression with both a random intercept and a random slope for the treatment effect.Results31 smoking cessation research trials were selected for the study: eight comprised adolescent samples, eight comprised adults with chronic physical or mental illness, five comprised pregnant/postpartum women and 10 comprised other adult samples. Analysis of the trials (9485 individual participants) showed an overall OR comparing likelihood of abstinence in the motivational interviewing (MI) versus control condition of OR 1.45 (95% CI 1.14 to 1.83). Additional potential correlates of treatment effects such as study, sample, and intervention characteristics were examined.ConclusionsThis is the most comprehensive review of MI for smoking cessation conducted to date. These findings suggest that current MI smoking cessation approaches can be effective for adolescents and adults. However, comparative efficacy trials could be useful.
BACKGROUND:Comorbidity adjustment is an important component of health services research and clinical prognosis. When adjusting for comorbidities in statistical models, researchers can include ...comorbidities individually or through the use of summary measures such as the Charlson Comorbidity Index or Elixhauser score. We examined the conditions under which individual versus summary measures are most appropriate.
METHODS:We provide an analytic proof of the utility of comorbidity summary measures when used in place of individual comorbidities. We compared the use of the Charlson and Elixhauser scores versus individual comorbidities in prognostic models using a SEER-Medicare data example. We examined the ability of summary comorbidity measures to adjust for confounding using simulations.
RESULTS:We devised a mathematical proof that found that the comorbidity summary measures are appropriate prognostic or adjustment mechanisms in survival analyses. Once one knows the comorbidity score, no other information about the comorbidity variables used to create the score is generally needed. Our data example and simulations largely confirmed this finding.
CONCLUSIONS:Summary comorbidity measures, such as the Charlson Comorbidity Index and Elixhauser scores, are commonly used for clinical prognosis and comorbidity adjustment. We have provided a theoretical justification that validates the use of such scores under many conditions. Our simulations generally confirm the utility of the summary comorbidity measures as substitutes for use of the individual comorbidity variables in health services research. One caveat is that a summary measure may only be as good as the variables used to create it.
Abstract
Background
Survival disparities between Black and White head and neck cancer patients are well documented, with access to care and socioeconomic status as major contributors. We set out to ...assess the role of self-reported race in head and neck cancer by evaluating treatment outcomes of patients enrolled in clinical trials, where access to care and socioeconomic status confounders are minimized.
Methods
Clinical trial data from the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group studies were obtained. Studies were included if they were therapeutic trials that employed survival as an endpoint. Studies that did not report survival as an endpoint were excluded; 7 Radiation Therapy Oncology Group Studies were included for study. For each Black patient enrolled in a clinical trial, a study arm–matched White patient was used as a control.
Results
A total of 468 Black participants were identified and matched with 468 White study arm–specific controls. White participants had better outcomes than Black participants in 60% of matched pairs (P < .001). Black participants were consistently more likely to have worse outcomes. When outcomes were measured by progression-free survival or disease-free survival, the failure rate was statistically significantly higher in Black participants (hazard ratio HR = 1.50, P < .001). Failure was largely due to locoregional failure, and Black participants were at higher risk (subdistribution HR =1.51, P = .002). The development of distant metastasis within the paired cohorts was not statistically significantly different.
Conclusion
In this study of clinical trial participants using self-reported race, Black participants consistently had worse outcomes in comparison to study arm–specific White controls. Further study is needed to confirm these findings and to explore causes underlying this disparity.
Many patients with localized node-negative renal cell carcinoma (RCC) are elderly with competing comorbidities. Their overall survival benefit after surgical treatment is unknown. We reviewed cases ...in the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database to evaluate the impact of kidney cancer versus competing causes of death in patients with localized RCC and develop a comprehensive nomogram to quantitate survival differences.
We identified individuals with localized, surgically treated clear-cell, papillary, or chromophobe RCC in SEER (1988 through 2003). We used Fine and Gray competing risks proportional hazards regressions to predict 5-year probabilities of three competing mortality outcomes: kidney cancer death, other cancer death, and noncancer death.
We identified 30,801 cases of localized RCC (median age, 62 years; median tumor size, 4.5 cm). Five-year probabilities of kidney cancer death, other cancer death, and noncancer death were 4%, 7%, and 11%, respectively. Age was strongly predictive of mortality and most predictive of nonkidney cancer deaths (P < .001). Increasing tumor size was related to death from RCC and inversely related to noncancer deaths (P < .001). Racial differences in outcomes were most pronounced for nonkidney cancer deaths (P < .001). Men were more likely to die than women from all causes (P < .002). This nomogram integrates commonly available factors into a useful tool for comparing competing risks of death.
Management of localized RCC must consider competing causes of mortality, particularly in elderly populations. Effective decision making requires treatment trade-off calculations. We present a tool to quantitate competing causes of mortality in patients with localized RCC.
Hospitals have difficulty justifying the expense of maintaining trauma centers without strong evidence of their effectiveness. To address this gap, we examined differences in mortality between level ...1 trauma centers and hospitals without a trauma center (non-trauma centers).
Mortality outcomes were compared among patients treated in 18 hospitals with a level 1 trauma center and 51 hospitals non-trauma centers located in 14 states. Patients 18 to 84 years old with a moderate-to-severe injury were eligible. Complete data were obtained for 1104 patients who died in the hospital and 4087 patients who were discharged alive. We used propensity-score weighting to adjust for observable differences between patients treated at trauma centers and those treated at non-trauma centers.
After adjustment for differences in the case mix, the in-hospital mortality rate was significantly lower at trauma centers than at non-trauma centers (7.6 percent vs. 9.5 percent; relative risk, 0.80; 95 percent confidence interval, 0.66 to 0.98), as was the one-year mortality rate (10.4 percent vs. 13.8 percent; relative risk, 0.75; 95 percent confidence interval, 0.60 to 0.95). The effects of treatment at a trauma center varied according to the severity of injury, with evidence to suggest that differences in mortality rates were primarily confined to patients with more severe injuries.
Our findings show that the risk of death is significantly lower when care is provided in a trauma center than in a non-trauma center and argue for continued efforts at regionalization.
Time to surgery (TTS) is of concern to patients and clinicians, but controversy surrounds its effect on breast cancer survival. There remains little national data evaluating the association.
To ...investigate the relationship between the time from diagnosis to breast cancer surgery and survival, using separate analyses of 2 of the largest cancer databases in the United States.
Two independent population-based studies were conducted of prospectively collected national data from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER)-Medicare-linked database and the National Cancer Database (NCDB). The SEER-Medicare cohort included Medicare patients older than 65 years, and the NCDB cohort included patients cared for at Commission on Cancer-accredited facilities throughout the United States. Each analysis assessed overall survival as a function of time between diagnosis and surgery by evaluating 5 intervals (≤30, 31-60, 61-90, 91-120, and 121-180 days) and disease-specific survival at 60-day intervals. All patients were diagnosed with noninflammatory, nonmetastatic, invasive breast cancer and underwent surgery as initial treatment.
Overall and disease-specific survival as a function of time between diagnosis and surgery, after adjusting for patient, demographic, and tumor-related factors.
The SEER-Medicare cohort had 94 544 patients 66 years or older diagnosed between 1992 and 2009. With each interval of delay increase, overall survival was lower overall (hazard ratio HR, 1.09; 95% CI, 1.06-1.13; P < .001), and in patients with stage I (HR, 1.13; 95% CI, 1.08-1.18; P < .001) and stage II disease (HR 1.06; 95% CI, 1.01-1.11; P = .01). Breast cancer-specific mortality increased with each 60-day interval (subdistribution hazard ratio sHR, 1.26; 95% CI, 1.02-1.54; P = .03). The NCDB study evaluated 115 790 patients 18 years or older diagnosed between 2003 and 2005. The overall mortality HR was 1.10 (95% CI, 1.07-1.13; P < .001) for each increasing interval, significant in stages I (HR, 1.16; 95% CI, 1.12-1.21; P < .001) and II (HR, 1.09; 95% CI, 1.05-1.13; P < .001) only, after adjusting for demographic, tumor, and treatment factors.
Greater TTS is associated with lower overall and disease-specific survival, and a shortened delay is associated with benefits comparable to some standard therapies. Although time is required for preoperative evaluation and consideration of options such as reconstruction, efforts to reduce TTS should be pursued when possible to enhance survival.
The volume-outcomes relationship has led many to advocate centralization of cancer procedures at high volume hospitals (HVH). We hypothesized that in response cancer surgery has become increasingly ...centralized and that this centralization has resulted in increased travel burden for patients.
Using 1996 to 2006 discharge data from NY, NJ, PA, all patients > or = 18 years old treated with extirpative surgery for colorectal, esophageal, or pancreatic cancer were examined. Patients and hospitals were geocoded. Annual hospital procedure volume for each tumor site was examined, and multiple quantile and logistic regressions were used to compare changes in centralization and distance traveled.
Five thousand two hundred seventy-three esophageal, 13,472 pancreatic, 202,879 colon, and 51,262 rectal procedures were included. A shift to HVH occurred to varying degrees for all tumor types. The odds of surgery at a low volume hospital decreased for esophagus, pancreas and colon: per year odds ratios (ORs) were 0.87 (95% CI, 0.85 to 0.90), 0.85 (95% CI, 0.84 to 0.87), and 0.97 (95% CI, 0.97 to 0.98). Median travel distance increased for all sites: esophagus 72%, pancreas 40%, colon 17%, and rectum 28% (P < .0001). Travel distance was proportional to procedure volume (P < .0001). The majority of the increase in distance was attributable to centralization.
There has been extensive centralization of complex cancer surgery over the past decade. While this process should result in population-level improvements in cancer outcomes, centralization is increasing patient travel. For some subsets of the population, increasing travel requirements may pose a significant barrier to access to quality cancer care.
To estimate the overall survival (OS) impact from increasing time to treatment initiation (TTI) for patients with head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC).
Using the National Cancer Data Base ...(NCDB), we examined patients who received curative therapy for the following sites: oral tongue, oropharynx, larynx, and hypopharynx. TTI was the number of days from diagnosis to initiation of curative treatment. The effect of TTI on OS was determined by using Cox regression models (MVA). Recursive partitioning analysis (RPA) identified TTI thresholds via conditional inference trees to estimate the greatest differences in OS on the basis of randomly selected training and validation sets, and repeated this 1,000 times to ensure robustness of TTI thresholds.
A total of 51,655 patients were included. On MVA, TTI of 61 to 90 days versus less than 30 days (hazard ratio HR, 1.13; 95% CI, 1.08 to 1.19) independently increased mortality risk. TTI of 67 days appeared as the optimal threshold on the training RPA, statistical significance was confirmed in the validation set (P < .001), and the 67-day TTI was the optimal threshold in 54% of repeated simulations. Overall, 96% of simulations validated two optimal TTI thresholds, with ranges of 46 to 52 days and 62 to 67 days. The median OS for TTI of 46 to 52 days or fewer versus 53 to 67 days versus greater than 67 days was 71.9 months (95% CI, 70.3 to 73.5 months) versus 61 months (95% CI, 57 to 66.1 months) versus 46.6 months (95% CI, 42.8 to 50.7 months), respectively (P < .001). In the most recent year with available data (2011), 25% of patients had TTI of greater than 46 days.
TTI independently affects survival. One in four patients experienced treatment delay. TTI of greater than 46 to 52 days introduced an increased risk of death that was most consistently detrimental beyond 60 days. Prolonged TTI is currently affecting survival.
Purpose The incidence of renal cell carcinoma is increasing due to the incidental detection of small renal masses. Resection, predominantly by nephron sparing surgery, remains the standard of care ...due to its durable oncological outcomes. Active surveillance and ablative technologies have emerged as alternatives to surgery in select patients. We performed a meta-analysis of published data evaluating nephron sparing surgery, cryoablation, radio frequency ablation and observation for small renal masses to define the current data. Materials and Methods A MEDLINE® search was performed for clinically localized sporadic renal masses. Patient age, tumor size, duration of followup, available pathological data and oncological outcomes were evaluated. Results A total of 99 studies representing 6,471 lesions were analyzed. Significant differences in mean patient age (p <0.001), tumor size (p <0.001) and followup duration (p <0.001) were detected among treatment modalities. The incidence of unknown/indeterminate pathological findings was significantly different among cryoablation, radio frequency ablation and observation (p = 0.003), and a significant difference in the rates of malignancy among lesions with known pathological results was detected (p = 0.001). Compared to nephron sparing surgery significantly increased local progression rates were calculated for cryoablation (RR = 7.45) and radio frequency ablation (RR = 18.23). However, no statistical differences were detected in the incidence of metastatic progression regardless of whether lesions were excised, ablated or observed. Conclusions Nephron sparing surgery, ablation and surveillance are viable strategies for small renal masses based on short-term and intermediate term oncological outcomes. However, a significant selection bias exists in the application of these techniques. While long-term data have demonstrated durable outcomes for nephron sparing surgery, extended oncological efficacy is lacking for ablation and surveillance strategies. The extent to which treatment alters the natural history of small renal masses is not yet established.