Oops, you're using an old version of your browser so some of the features on this page may not be displaying properly.

MINIMAL Requirements: Google Chrome 24+Mozilla Firefox 20+Internet Explorer 11Opera 15–18Apple Safari 7SeaMonkey 2.15-2.23

E-Poster Display

1470P - Urban-rural differences in outcomes of patients with advanced gastroesophageal cancers

Date

17 Sep 2020

Session

E-Poster Display

Topics

Tumour Site

Gastric Cancer

Presenters

Jenny Peng

Citation

Annals of Oncology (2020) 31 (suppl_4): S841-S873. 10.1016/annonc/annonc284

Authors

J. Peng1, T. Abedin2, S. Kong3, W.Y. Cheung4

Author affiliations

  • 1 Internal Medicine, University of Calgary, T2N 4N2 - Calgary/CA
  • 2 Clinical Research Unit & Translational Laboratories, Tom Baker Cancer Centre, T2N4N2 - Calgary/CA
  • 3 Biostatistics, University of Calgary, T2N4N2 - CALGARY/CA
  • 4 Medical Oncology, Tom Baker Cancer Center, T2N 4N2 - CALGARY/CA

Resources

Login to get immediate access to this content.

If you do not have an ESMO account, please create one for free.

Abstract 1470P

Background

Advanced gastroesophageal cancers (AGCs) are aggressive and require multidisciplinary, tertiary care. We hypothesized that access to such care may differ between urban and rural patients. This study aimed to describe urban vs. rural patterns of referrals, treatments, and outcomes for a real-world, population-based cohort of patients with AGCs.

Methods

All patients diagnosed with AGCs from 2010 to 2017 in Alberta, Canada were identified from the province’s cancer registry. Each patient’s postal code was linked to the census tract to determine urban vs. rural residence. Data on time from referral to consultation and treatment modality were collated. Logistic and Cox regression were used to determine the associations of urban vs. rural status with referral plus treatment and overall survival (OS), respectively.

Results

A total of 1244 patients were included: median age was 67 (IQR 58-78) years, 72% were men, 633 (51%) had gastric and 611 (49%) had esophageal cancer. In this cohort, 87%, 80%, and 44% were referred to a cancer center, seen by an oncologist, and treated, respectively. Among referred patients, 73%, 24%, and 3% were from urban, rural, and unknown settings respectively. Median time from referral to consult was 11 days for both urban and rural populations (p=0.05). Patients with fewer hospitalizations waited 9 days from referral to consult compared to 13 days for individuals with more hospitalizations (p<0.001). Rural patients were less likely to be referred (OR 0.442, 95% CI 0.269-0.725, p=0.001) and treated (OR 0.643, 95% CI 0.426-0.971, p=0.036) whereas hospitalized patients (OR 2.855, 95% CI 1.158-7.042, p=0.023) and those with longer hospital stays (OR 2.728, 95% CI 1.603-4.644, p<0.001) were more likely to be referred. All patients experienced a poor prognosis, irrespective of urban vs. rural (HR 1.169, 95% CI 0.986-1.386, p=0.072) and hospitalization (HR 0.993, 95% CI 0.824-1.198, p=0.945) status.

Conclusions

Rural patients with AGCs face potential access barriers due to geography. By the time that patients are hospitalized, referral and treatment still translated to poor survival. Prompt referral and entry into the cancer care system is essential, particularly for patients who live remotely.

Clinical trial identification

Editorial acknowledgement

Legal entity responsible for the study

The authors.

Funding

Has not received any funding.

Disclosure

All authors have declared no conflicts of interest.

This site uses cookies. Some of these cookies are essential, while others help us improve your experience by providing insights into how the site is being used.

For more detailed information on the cookies we use, please check our Privacy Policy.

Customise settings
  • Necessary cookies enable core functionality. The website cannot function properly without these cookies, and you can only disable them by changing your browser preferences.