학술논문

Cancer Survival and Travel Time to Nearest Reference Care Center for 10 Cancer Sites: An Analysis of 21 French Cancer Registries
Document Type
article
Source
Cancers, Vol 15, Iss 5, p 1516 (2023)
Subject
cancer
outcomes
survival
travel time
geographical accessibility
Neoplasms. Tumors. Oncology. Including cancer and carcinogens
RC254-282
Language
English
ISSN
2072-6694
Abstract
Background: The impact of several non-clinical factors on cancer survival is poorly understood. The aim of this study was to investigate the influence of travel time to the nearest referral center on survival of patients with cancer. Patients and methods: The study used data from the French Network of Cancer Registries that combines all the French population-based cancer registries. For this study, we included the 10 most common solid invasive cancer sites in France between 1 January 2013 and 31 December 2015, representing 160,634 cases. Net survival was measured and estimated using flexible parametric survival models. Flexible excess mortality modelling was performed to investigate the association between travel time to the nearest referral center and patient survival. To allow the most flexible effects, restricted cubic splines were used to investigate the influence of travel times to the nearest cancer center on excess hazard ratio. Results: Among the 1-year and 5-year net survival results, lower survival was observed for patients residing farthest from the referral center for half of the included cancer types. The remoteness gap in survival was estimated to be up to 10% at 5 years for skin melanoma in men and 7% for lung cancer in women. The pattern of the effect of travel time was highly different according to tumor type, being either linear, reverse U-shape, non-significant, or better for more remote patients. For some sites restricted cubic splines of the effect of travel time on excess mortality were observed with a higher excess risk ratio as travel time increased. Conclusions: For numerous cancer sites, our results reveal geographical inequalities, with remote patients experiencing a worse prognosis, aside from the notable exception of prostate cancer. Future studies should evaluate the remoteness gap in more detail with more explanatory factors.