Virtual Library
Start Your Search
A. Linton
Author of
-
+
P3.03 - Poster Session with Presenters Present (ID 473)
- Event: WCLC 2016
- Type: Poster Presenters Present
- Track: Mesothelioma/Thymic Malignancies/Esophageal Cancer/Other Thoracic Malignancies
- Presentations: 1
- Moderators:
- Coordinates: 12/07/2016, 14:30 - 15:45, Hall B (Poster Area)
-
+
P3.03-033 - The Influence of Geographic and Socioeconomic Factors on Prognosis and Treatment Provision in Malignant Pleural Mesothelioma (ID 5941)
14:30 - 14:30 | Author(s): A. Linton
- Abstract
Background:
Whilst the impact of clinico-pathological factors on the prognosis of malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) is well understood, socio-economic and geographic factors have received less attention. Although the majority of Australians reside in major cities, a dispersed population lives in regional and remote areas, where access to clinical services may be limited. We investigated the association between geographic and socio-economic factors and treatment provision and survival in a large series of patients from New South Wales.
Methods:
All patients awarded compensation by the NSW Dust Diseases Board (2002-2009) following diagnosis with MPM were assessed. Geographic remoteness, distance from oncological multidisciplinary teams (MDT) and socioeconomic status according to the index of relative socio-economic advantage and disadvantage (IRSAD), were assessed with known prognostic factors using Kaplan Meir and Cox-regression analysis. Chi-square testing compared categorical variables to analyse the impact of these factors upon clinical features and treatment received. Cancer Registry incidence data was assessed to allow comparison of the compensated DDB cohort to all NSW MPM cases.
Results:
We assessed 910 patients: Geographic remoteness (major city 67%; regional/remote 33%), distance to MDT (<10km 65%, <50km 92%). Geographic distribution was comparable to cancer registry data. Median overall survival was 10.0 months. On multivariate analysis, non-epithelioid histological subtype (HR.2.19); male gender (HR=1.37); age >70 (HR=1.39) and IRSAD status by decreasing quintile (HR=1.07) were independent prognostic factors, with a pronounced survival difference between highest and lowest IRSAD quintiles (8.4 vs 12.8 months). A trend to improved survival when residing in major cities (10.6 vs 8.8 months; p=0.162) and within 50km of MDT (10.3 vs 7.8 months;p=0.539) was noted. Patients geographic location and distance to MDT affected the use of palliative radiotherapy (p<0.05) however did not impact chemotherapy, adjuvant radiotherapy or extrapleural pneumonectomy provision. Socioeconomically disadvantaged patients were less likely to receive chemotherapy (40.3% vs 47.7%; p=0.032), with pronounced disparity between the most socioeconomically advantaged and disadvantaged quintiles (54.2% vs 37.6%;p=0.001).
Conclusion:
Despite ‘universal’ health care and the support of a compensation scheme, socioeconomic disadvantage was an independent prognostic factor for MPM in NSW Australia. A significant reduction in chemotherapy utilisation was noted, particularly in highly socioeconomically deprived areas. Furthermore, a trend to improved survival was noted in patients residing in major cities within closer proximity to oncology units, though treatment provision did not differ. Prospective research analysing specific factors including comorbidity, income, and individual preference will be required to better understand these findings in both compensated and non-compensated individuals.
