Original Article
Travel distance and use of salvage palliative chemotherapy in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer
Abstract
Background: Salvage palliative chemotherapy in metastatic colorectal cancer has been associated with signi cant improvement in survival. However, not all patients receive all available therapies. Travel burden can affect patient access and use of future therapy. The present study aims to determine relationship between travel distance (TD) and salvage palliative chemotherapy in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer.
Methods: A patient cohort diagnosed with metastatic colorectal cancer during 2006–2010 in the province of Saskatchewan, Canada was studied. Logistic regression analyses were performed to assess relationship between travel distance and subsequent line therapies.
Results: The median age of 264 eligible patients was 62 years [interquartile range (IQR): 53–72]. The patients who received salvage systemic therapy had a median distance to travel of 60.0 km (IQR: 4.7–144) compared with 88.1 km (IQR: 4.8–189) if they did not receive second- or third-line therapy (P=0.06). In multivariate analysis distance to the cancer center <100 km, odds ratio (OR) 1.69 (95% CI: 1.003–2.84), no metastasectomy, OR 1.89 (95% CI: 1.03–3.46), and absence of comorbid illness as per Charlson comorbid index, OR 1.45 (95% CI: 1.19–1.77) were correlated with the use of second- and subsequent line therapies.
Conclusions: Our result revealed that travel distance to the cancer center greater than 100 km was associated less frequent use of second or subsequent line therapies in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer.
Methods: A patient cohort diagnosed with metastatic colorectal cancer during 2006–2010 in the province of Saskatchewan, Canada was studied. Logistic regression analyses were performed to assess relationship between travel distance and subsequent line therapies.
Results: The median age of 264 eligible patients was 62 years [interquartile range (IQR): 53–72]. The patients who received salvage systemic therapy had a median distance to travel of 60.0 km (IQR: 4.7–144) compared with 88.1 km (IQR: 4.8–189) if they did not receive second- or third-line therapy (P=0.06). In multivariate analysis distance to the cancer center <100 km, odds ratio (OR) 1.69 (95% CI: 1.003–2.84), no metastasectomy, OR 1.89 (95% CI: 1.03–3.46), and absence of comorbid illness as per Charlson comorbid index, OR 1.45 (95% CI: 1.19–1.77) were correlated with the use of second- and subsequent line therapies.
Conclusions: Our result revealed that travel distance to the cancer center greater than 100 km was associated less frequent use of second or subsequent line therapies in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer.
