Author of

• 16879

  +

  P1.07 - Poster Session with Presenters Present (ID 459)

  • Event: WCLC 2016
  • Type: Poster Presenters Present
  • Track: SCLC/Neuroendocrine Tumors
  • Presentations: 1
  • Moderators:
  • Coordinates: 12/05/2016, 14:30 - 15:45, Hall B (Poster Area)

  • 16925

    +

    P1.07-046 - Uptake of Recommended Treatment in Small Cell Lung Cancer: Trend over the Last 15 Years and Risk Factors (ID 6326)

    14:30 - 14:30  |  Author(s): T. Anggondowati
    • Abstract

    Background:
    Despite the dismal outcomes of small-cell lung cancer (SCLC), the fact that SCLC patients are generally responsive to treatment emphasizes the importance of adherence to recommended treatment. This study analyzed the trend in treatment provision in SCLC over the last 15 years and its associated factors.
    
    Methods:
    A total of 207,375 adult patients diagnosed with SCLC between 1998 and 2012 in the United States were identified from the National Cancer Data Base. In this study, recommended treatment was defined as surgery and/or chemoradiation for the limited stage (LS-SCLC), regardless of sequence; and chemotherapy for the extensive stage (ES-SCLC). We excluded patients who did not receive treatment due to a contraindication. Logistic regression was used to analyze the risk of not receiving recommended treatment, adjusted for socio-demographics, facility type, and clinical factors. Kaplan-Meier estimator was used to estimate patients’ survival.
    
    Results:
    Between 1998 and 2012, the proportion of patients receiving recommended treatment increased among LS-SCLC patients (63% to 73.4%), but was unchanged in ES-SCLC (75.7% to 76.6%). Nevertheless, a significant proportion of patients did not receive recommended treatments. Older age, low income, use of non-private insurance or no insurance, higher comorbidity score, and diagnosis and/or treatment at a community cancer program were independent predictors of inadequate treatment for both LS-SCLC and ES-SCLC, while Black race was a predictor only in LS-SCLC. For instance, compared to patients with private insurance, the odd ratios of uninsured patients not receiving recommended treatment or no treatment was 1.7 (95% CI 1.543-1.932) in LS-SCLC and 1.9 (95% CI 1.751-2.060) in ES-SCLC patients. Both LS-SCLC and ES-SCLC patients aged 65-74 years had 1.5 (95% CI for LS-SCLC: 1.402-1.587; 95% CI for ES-SCLC: 1.454-1.613) times higher odds of not receiving recommended treatment or no treatment, compared to younger patients. In both groups, patients who received recommended treatment had better survival than those who did not receive recommended treatment or any treatment (median survival time of 18.4 vs. 6 months in LS-SCLC; 8.3 vs. 1.2 months in ES-SCLC).
    
    Conclusion:
    This study demonstrated an increase in the uptake of recommended treatment in LS-SCLC, but relatively no change in ES-SCLC. Reasons for not receiving recommended treatment warrant further investigation. The survival benefit among patients with recommended treatment highlights the need to alleviate any system-based barriers that may impact more patients receiving recommended treatment.