Postoperative Outcomes Among Patients Undergoing Cancer Surgery: United States versus International Medical Graduates.

OBJECTIVE: We sought to characterize postoperative outcomes among patients who underwent an oncologic operation relative to whether the treating surgeon was an international medical graduate (IMG) versus a United States medical graduate (USMG). SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: IMGs comprise approximately one-quarter of the physician workforce in the United States. METHODS: The 100% Medicare Standard Analytic Files were utilized to extract data on patients with breast, lung, hepato-pancreato-biliary (HPB), and colorectal cancer who underwent surgical resection between 2014 and 2020. Entropy balancing (EB) and multivariable regression analysis were performed to evaluate the association between postoperative outcomes among USMG and IMG surgeons. RESULTS: Among 285,930 beneficiaries, 242,914 (85.0%) and 43,016 (15.0%) underwent surgery by a USMG and IMG surgeon, respectively. Overall, 129,576 (45.3%) individuals were male, and 168,848 (59.1%) patients had a Charlson Comorbidity Index score >2. Notably, IMG surgeons were more likely to care for racial/ethnic minority patients (14.7% vs. 12.5%) and those with a high social vulnerability index (33.3% vs. 32.1%) (all P<0.001). On multivariable analysis after EB, patients treated by an IMG surgeon were less likely to experience adverse postoperative outcomes including 90-day readmission (OR 0.89, 95%CI 0.80-0.99) and index complications (OR 0.84, 95%CI 0.74-0.95) versus USMG surgeons (all P<0.05). Patients treated by IMG versus USMG surgeons had no difference in likelihood to achieve a textbook outcome (OR 1.10, 95%CI 0.99-1.21; P=0.077). CONCLUSIONS: Postoperative outcomes among patients treated by IMG surgeons were roughly equivalent to those of USMG surgeons. In addition, IMG surgeons were more likely to care for patients with multiple comorbidities and individuals from vulnerable communities.

Effect of Telemedicine Use on Medical Spending and Health Care Utilization among Patients with Gastrointestinal Cancer.

INTRODUCTION: We sought to assess the impact of telemedicine on healthcare utilization and medical expenditures among patients with a diagnosis of gastrointestinal (GI) cancer. METHODS: Patients with a newly diagnosed GI cancer from 2013 to 2020 were identified from the IBM MarketScan database. Healthcare utilization, total medical outpatient insurance payments within one-year post-diagnosis, and out-of-pocket (OOP) expenses between telemedicine users and non-users were assessed after propensity score matching (PSM). RESULTS: Among 32,677 patients with a GI cancer (esophageal, n=1,862, 5.7%; gastric, n=2,009, 6.1%; liver, n=2,929, 9.0%; bile duct, n=597, 1.8%; pancreas, n=3,083, 9.4%; colorectal, n=22,197, 67.9%), a total of 3,063 (9.7%) utilized telemedicine. After PSM (telemedicine users, n=3,064; non-users, n=3,064), telemedicine users demonstrated a higher frequency of clinic visits (median: 5.0 days, IQR 4.0-7.0 vs. non-users: 2.0 days, IQR 2.0-3.0, p<0.001) and fewer potential days missed from daily activities (median: 7.5 days, IQR 4.5-12.5 vs. non-users: 8.5 days, IQR 5.5-13.5, p<0.001). Total medical spending per month and utilization of emergency room visits for telemedicine users was higher versus non-users (median: $10,658, IQR $5,112-$18,528 vs. non-users: $10,103, IQR $4,628-$16,750; 46.8% vs. 42.6%, both p<0.01), while monthly OOP costs were comparable (median: $273, IQR $137-$449 for telemedicine users vs. non-users: $268, IQR $142-$434, p=0.625). CONCLUSION: Telemedicine utilization was associated with increased outpatient clinic visits yet reduced potential days missed from daily activities among patients with GI cancer. Telemedicine users tended to have higher ER visits rate and total medical spending per month, although monthly OOP costs were comparable with non-users.

Impact of Patient, Hospital, and Operative Characteristics relative to Social Determinants of Health: Compliance with National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) Guidelines for Colon Cancer.

INTRODUCTION: Despite an established association with improved patient outcomes, compliance with National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guidelines remains sub-optimal. We sought to assess the impact of patient (PCs), operative (OCs), and hospital characteristics (HCs), and social determinants of health (SDoH) on non-compliance with NCCN guidelines for colon cancer. METHODS: Patients treated for Stage I-III colon cancer from 2004-2017 were identified from National Cancer Database. Multi-level multivariable regression analysis was performed to identify factors associated with receipt of NCCN-compliant care, as well as quantify the proportion of variance explained by PCs, OCs, HCs, and SDoH. RESULTS: Among 468,097 patients with colon cancer treated across 1,319 hospitals, one in four patients did not receive NCCN-compliant care (n=122,170, 26.1%). On regression analysis, older age (0.96, 95% CI 0.96-0.96), female sex (0.97, 95% CI 0.96-0.99), Black race (0.96, 95% CI 0.94-0.98), higher Charlson-Deyo score (0.84, 95% CI 0.82-0.86), tumor stage ≥II (0.42, 95% CI 0.40-0.44), and tumor grade ≥3 (0.33, 95% CI 0.32-0.34) were associated with lower odds of receiving NCCN-compliant care (all p-values<0.05). Higher hospital volume (1.02, 95% CI 1.02-1.03), minimally invasive or robotic surgical approach (1.26, 95% CI 1.23-1.29), adequate (≥12) lymph node assessment (3.46, 95% CI 3.38-3.53), private insurance status (1.33, 95% CI 1.26-1.40), Medicare insurance status (1.42, 95% CI 1.35-1.49), and higher educational status (1.06, 95% CI 1.02-1.09) were associated with higher odds of receiving NCCN-compliant care (all p-values<0.05). Overall, PCs contributed 36.5%, HCs contributed 1.3%, OCs contributed 12.9% to variation in guideline compliant care; SDoH contributed only 3.6% of the variation in receipt of NCCN-compliant care. CONCLUSION: Variation in NCCN-compliant care among patients with colon cancer was largely attributable to patient- and surgeon-level factors, while SDoH were associated with a smaller proportion of the variation.

Association of county-level provider density and social vulnerability with colorectal cancer-related mortality.

BACKGROUND: Health care providers play a crucial role in increasing overall awareness, screening, and treatment of cancer, leading to reduced cancer mortality. We sought to characterize the impact of provider density on colorectal cancer population-level mortality. METHODS: County-level provider data, obtained from the Area Health Resource File between 2016 and 2018, were used to calculate provider density per county. These data were merged with county-level colorectal cancer mortality 2016-2020 data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Multivariable regression was performed to define the association between provider density and colorectal cancer mortality. RESULTS: Among 2,863 counties included in the analytic cohort, 1,132 (39.5%) and 1,731 (60.5%) counties were categorized as urban and rural, respectively. The colorectal cancer-related crude mortality rate was higher in counties with low provider density versus counties with moderate or high provider density (low = 22.9, moderate = 21.6, high = 19.3 per 100,000 individuals; P < .001). On multivariable analysis, the odds of colorectal cancer mortality were lower in counties with moderate and high provider density versus counties with low provider density (moderate odds ratio 0.97, 95% confidence interval 0.94-0.99; high odds ratio 0.88, 95% confidence interval 0.86-0.91). High provider density remained associated with a lower likelihood of colorectal cancer mortality independent of social vulnerability index (low social vulnerability index and high provider density: odds ratio 0.85, 95% confidence interval 0.81-0.89; high social vulnerability index and high provider density: odds ratio 0.93, 95% confidence interval 0.89-0.98). CONCLUSION: Regardless of social vulnerability index, high county-level provider density was associated with lower colorectal cancer-related mortality. Efforts to increase access to health care providers may improve health care equity, as well as long-term cancer outcomes.

Impact of an artificial intelligence based model to predict non-transplantable recurrence among patients with hepatocellular carcinoma.

OBJECTIVE: We sought to develop Artificial Intelligence (AI) based models to predict non-transplantable recurrence (NTR) of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) following hepatic resection (HR). METHODS: HCC patients who underwent HR between 2000-2020 were identified from a multi-institutional database. NTR was defined as recurrence beyond Milan Criteria. Different machine learning (ML) and deep learning (DL) techniques were used to develop and validate two prediction models for NTR, one using only preoperative factors and a second using both preoperative and postoperative factors. RESULTS: Overall, 1763 HCC patients were included. Among 877 patients with recurrence, 364 (41.5%) patients developed NTR. An ensemble AI model demonstrated the highest area under ROC curves (AUC) of 0.751 (95% CI: 0.719-0.782) and 0.717 (95% CI:0.653-0.782) in the training and testing cohorts, respectively which improved to 0.858 (95% CI: 0.835-0.884) and 0.764 (95% CI: 0.704-0.826), respectively after incorporation of postoperative pathologic factors. Radiologic tumor burden score and pathological microvascular invasion were the most important preoperative and postoperative factors, respectively to predict NTR. Patients predicted to develop NTR had overall 1- and 5-year survival of 75.6% and 28.2%, versus 93.4% and 55.9%, respectively, among patients predicted to not develop NTR (p < 0.0001). CONCLUSION: The AI preoperative model may help inform decision of HR versus LT for HCC, while the combined AI model can frame individualized postoperative care (https://altaf-pawlik-hcc-ntr-calculator.streamlit.app/).

Impact of early primary care physician follow-up on hospital readmission following gastrointestinal cancer surgery.

BACKGROUND: We sought to examine the association between primary care physician (PCP) follow-up on readmission following gastrointestinal (GI) cancer surgery. METHODS: Patients who underwent surgery for GI cancer were identified using the Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) database. Multivariable regression was performed to examine the association between early PCP follow-up and hospital readmission. RESULTS: Among 60 957 patients who underwent GI cancer surgery, 19 661 (32.7%) visited a PCP within 30-days after discharge. Of note, patients who visited PCP were less likely to be readmitted within 90 days (PCP visit: 17.4% vs. no PCP visit: 28.2%; p < 0.001). Median postsurgical expenditures were lower among patients who visited a PCP (PCP visit: $4116 [IQR: $670-$13 860] vs. no PCP visit: $6700 [IQR: $870-$21 301]; p < 0.001). On multivariable analysis, PCP follow-up was associated with lower odds of 90-day readmission (OR: 0.52, 95% CI: 0.50-0.55) (both p < 0.001). Moreover, patients who followed up with a PCP had lower risk of death at 90-days (HR: 0.50, 95% CI: 0.40-0.51; p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: PCP follow-up was associated with a reduced risk of readmission and mortality following GI cancer surgery. Care coordination across in-hospital and community-based health platforms is critical to achieve optimal outcomes for patients.

Association of preoperative cholangitis with outcomes and expenditures among patients undergoing pancreaticoduodenectomy.

BACKGROUND: This study aimed to characterize the association of preoperative acute cholangitis (PAC) with surgical outcomes and healthcare costs. METHODS: Patients who underwent pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) between 2013 and 2021 were identified using 100% Medicare Standard Analytic Files. PAC was defined as the occurrence of at least 1 episode of acute cholangitis within the year preceding surgery. Multivariable regression analyses were used to compare postoperative outcomes and costs relative to PAC. RESULTS: Among 23,455 Medicare beneficiaries who underwent PD, 2,217 patients (9.5%) had at least 1 episode of PAC. Most patients (n = 14,729 [62.8%]) underwent PD for a malignant indication. On multivariable analyses, PAC was associated with elevated odds of surgical site infection (odds ratio [OR], 1.14; 95% CI, 1.01-1.29), sepsis (OR, 1.17; 95% CI, 1.01-1.37), extended length of stay (OR, 1.13; 95% CI, 1.01-1.26), and readmission within 90 days (OR, 1.14; 95% CI, 1.04-1.26). Patients with a history of PAC before PD had a reduced likelihood of achieving a postoperative textbook outcome (OR, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.75-0.92) along with 87.8% and 18.4% higher associated preoperative and postoperative healthcare costs, respectively (all P < .001). Overall costs increased substantially among patients with more than 1 PAC episode ($59,893 [95% CI, $57,827-$61,959] for no episode vs $77,922 [95% CI, $73,854-$81,990] for 1 episode vs $101,205 [95% CI, $94,871-$107,539] for multiple episodes). CONCLUSION: Approximately 1 in 10 patients undergoing PD experienced an antecedent PAC episode, which was associated with adverse surgical outcomes and greater healthcare expenditures.

Healthcare utilization and expenditures among patients with venous thromboembolism following gastrointestinal cancer surgery.

BACKGROUND: We sought to assess healthcare utilization and expenditures among patients who developed venous thromboembolism (VTE) after gastrointestinal cancer surgery. METHODS: Patients who underwent surgery for esophageal, gastric, hepatic, biliary duct, pancreatic, and colorectal cancer between 2013 and 2020 were identified using the MarketScan database. Entropy balancing was performed to obtain a cohort that was well balanced relative to different clinical covariates. Generalized linear models were used to compare 1-year postdischarge costs among patients who did and did not develop a postoperative VTE. RESULTS: Among 20,253 individuals in the analytical cohort (esophagus [n = 518 {2.6%}], stomach [n = 970 {4.8%}], liver [n = 608 {3.0%}], bile duct [n = 294 {1.5%}], pancreas [n = 1511 {7.5%}], colon [n = 12,222 {60.3%}], and rectum [n = 4130 {20.4%}]), 894 (4.4%) developed VTE. Overall, most patients were male (n = 10,656 [52.6%]), aged between 55 and 64 years (n = 10,372 [51.2%]), and were employed full time (n = 11,408 [56.3%]). On multivariable analysis, VTE was associated with higher inpatient (mean difference [MD], $17,547; 95% CI, $15,141-$19,952), outpatient (MD, $8769; 95% CI, $7045-$10,491), and pharmacy (MD, $2811; 95% CI, $2509-$3113) expenditures (all P < .001). Furthermore, patients who developed VTE had higher out-of-pocket costs for inpatient (MD, $159; 95% CI, $66-$253) and pharmacy (MD, $122; 95% CI, $109-$136) services (all P < .001). CONCLUSION: Among privately insured patients aged <65 years, VTE was associated with increased healthcare utilization and expenditures during the first year after discharge.

Long-term Health Outcomes of New Persistent Opioid Use After Gastrointestinal Cancer Surgery.

BACKGROUND: New persistent opioid use (NPOU) after surgery has been identified as a common complication. This study sought to assess the long-term health outcomes among patients who experienced NPOU after gastrointestinal (GI) cancer surgery. METHODS: Patients who underwent surgery for hepato-pancreato-biliary and colorectal cancer between 2007 and 2019 were identified using the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER)-Medicare-linked database. Mixed-effect multivariable logistic regression and Cox proportional hazard models were used to estimate the risk of mortality and hospital visits related to falls, respiratory events, or pain symptoms. RESULTS: Among 15,456 patients who underwent GI cancer surgery, 967(6.6%) experienced NPOU. Notably, the patients at risk for the development of NPOU were those with a history of substance abuse (odds ratio [OR], 1.45; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.14-1.84), moderate social vulnerability (OR, 1.26; 95% CI, 1.06-1.50), an advanced disease stage (OR, 4.42; 95% CI, 3.51-5.82), or perioperative opioid use (OR, 3.07; 95% CI, 2.59-3.63. After control for competing risk factors, patients who experienced NPOU were more likely to visit a hospital for falls, respiratory events, or pain symptoms (OR, 1.45, 95% CI 1.18-1.78). Moreover, patients who experienced NPOU had a greater risk of death at 1 year (hazard ratio [HR], 2.15; 95% CI, 1.74-2.66). CONCLUSION: Approximately 1 in 15 patients experienced NPOU after GI cancer surgery. NPOU was associated with an increased risk of subsequent hospital visits and higher mortality. Targeted interventions for individuals at higher risk for NPOU after surgery should be used to help mitigate the harmful effects of NPOU.

Care fragmentation in hepatopancreatic surgery and postoperative outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Practice fragmentation in surgery may be associated with poor quality of care. We sought to define the association between fragmented practice and outcomes in hepatopancreatic surgery relative to surgeon volume and sex. METHODS: Medicare beneficiaries who underwent hepatopancreatic surgery between 2016 and 2021 were identified. Multivariable analysis was performed to determine provider sex-based differences in the rate of fragmented practice relative to the achievement of a textbook outcome and health care expenditures after adjusting for procedure-specific case volume. RESULTS: Among 37,416 patients, almost one-half were female (n = 18,333, 49.0%) with the majority treated by male surgeons (n = 33,697, 90.8%). Female surgeons were more likely to have a greater rate of fragmented practice (females: n = 242, 84.9% vs males: n = 1,487, 78.4%, P = .003; odds ratio 2.66, 95% confidence interval 2.33-3.03, P < .001). Patients treated by high rate of fragmented practice surgeons had increased odds of postoperative complications (odds ratio 1.40, 95% confidence interval 1.28-1.54), extended length-of-stay (odds ratio 1.52, 95% confidence interval 1.38-1.68), 90-day-mortality (odds ratio 1.49, 95% confidence interval 1.28-1.72), and lower odds of achieving a textbook outcome (odds ratio 0.76, 95% confidence interval 0.71-0.83). This association persisted independent of surgeon-specific volume (textbook outcome, high vs low rate of fragmented practice: high-volume surgeon, odds ratio 0.53, 95% confidence interval 0.31-0.91, P = .021 vs. low-volume surgeon, odds ratio 0.76, 95% confidence interval 0.69-0.82, P < .001). Among patients treated by male surgeons, a high rate of fragmented practice was associated with reduced odds of achieving a textbook outcome (male surgeons: odds ratio 0.76, 95% confidence interval 0.70-0.82, P < .001; female surgeons: odds ratio 0.81, 95% confidence interval 0.63-1.05, P = .110). Treatment by surgeons with higher fragmented practice was associated with higher expenditures (index expenditure: percentage difference 9.87, 95% confidence interval, 7.42-12.36; P < .05). CONCLUSION: A high rate of fragmented practice adversely affected postoperative outcomes and healthcare expenditures even among high-volume surgeons with the impact varying based on surgeon sex.

The Role of Delirium on Short- and Long-Term Postoperative Outcomes Following Major Gastrointestinal Surgery for Cancer.

INTRODUCTION: The growing burden of an aging population has raised concerns about demands on healthcare systems and resources, particularly in the context of surgical and cancer care. Delirium can affect treatment outcomes and patient recovery. We sought to determine the prevalence of postoperative delirium among patients undergoing digestive tract surgery for malignant indications and to analyze the role of delirium on surgical outcomes. METHODS: Medicare claims data were queried to identify patients diagnosed with esophageal, gastric, hepatobiliary, pancreatic, and colorectal cancers between 2018 and 2021. Postoperative delirium, occurring within 30 days of operation, was identified via International Classification of Diseases, 10th edition codes. Clinical outcomes of interested included "ideal" textbook outcome (TO), characterized as the absence of complications, an extended hospital stay, readmission within 90 days, or mortality within 90 days. Discharge disposition, intensive care unit (ICU) utilization, and expenditures also were examined. RESULTS: Among 115,654 cancer patients (esophageal: n = 1854, 1.6%; gastric: n = 4690, 4.1%; hepatobiliary: n = 6873, 5.9%; pancreatic: n = 8912, 7.7%; colorectal: n = 93,325, 90.7%), 2831 (2.4%) were diagnosed with delirium within 30 days after surgery. On multivariable analysis, patients with delirium were less likely to achieve TO (OR 0.27 [95% CI 0.25-0.30]). In particular, patients who experienced delirium had higher odds of complications (OR 3.00 [2.76-3.25]), prolonged length of stay (OR 3.46 [3.18-3.76]), 90-day readmission (OR 1.96 [1.81-2.12]), and 90-day mortality (OR 2.78 [2.51-3.08]). Furthermore, patients with delirium had higher ICU utilization (OR 2.85 [2.62-3.11]). Upon discharge, patients with delirium had a decreased likelihood of being sent home (OR 0.40 [0.36-0.46]) and instead were more likely to be transferred to a skilled nursing facility (OR 2.17 [1.94-2.44]). Due to increased utilization of hospital resources, patients with delirium incurred in-hospital expenditures that were 55.4% higher (no delirium: $16,284 vs. delirium: $28,742) and 90-day expenditures that were 100.7% higher (no delirium: $2564 vs. delirium: $8226) (both p < 0.001). Notably, 3-year postoperative survival was adversely affected by delirium (no delirium: 55.5% vs. delirium: 37.3%), even after adjusting risk for confounding factors (HR 1.79 [1.70-1.90]; p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Postoperative delirium occurred in one in 50 patients undergoing surgical resection of a digestive tract cancer. Delirium was linked to a reduced likelihood of achieving an optimal postoperative outcome, increased ICU utilization, higher expenditures, and a worse long-term prognosis. Initiatives to prevent delirium are vital to improve postoperative outcomes among cancer surgery patients.

Impact of intraoperative fluid administration and complications in head and neck cancer free flap surgery at a tertiary care hospital of a low and middle-income country.

Perioperative fluid administration plays an essential role in head and neck cancer free flap surgery. The impact of intraoperative fluid administration on postoperative complications in head and neck cancer free flap surgery remains ill-defined. All adult patients who underwent a free flap surgery for head and neck cancer between January 2014 and December 2018 were included in the study. A total of 224 patients met the inclusion criteria. The mean age of patients was 45.0 years, and the majority were male (85.7%). Buccal mucosa squamous cell carcinoma (83%) was the most common diagnosis, and anterolateral thigh flap (46.4%) was the most routinely performed procedure. Perioperatively, ringer's lactate was used most abundantly (68.3%). A total of 101 complications were reported in the postoperative period, consisting of 67 medical complications and 34 surgical complications. In conclusion, there is no statistically significant association between the quantity of fluid administration and postoperative complications.

Medicaid expansion and palliative care for advanced-stage liver cancer.

BACKGROUND: Medicaid expansion (ME) has contributed to transforming the United States healthcare system. However, its effect on palliative care of primary liver cancers remains unknown. This study aimed to evaluate the association between ME and the receipt of palliative treatment in advanced-stage liver cancer. METHODS: Patients diagnosed with stage IV hepatocellular carcinoma or intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma were identified from the National Cancer Database and divided into pre-expansion (2010-2013) and postexpansion (2015-2019) cohorts. Logistic regression identified predictors of palliative treatment. Difference-in-difference (DID) analysis assessed changes in palliative care use between patients living in ME states and patients living in non-ME states. RESULTS: Among 12,516 patients, 4582 (36.6%) were diagnosed before expansion, and 7934 (63.6%) were diagnosed after expansion. Overall, rates of palliative treatment increased after ME (18.1% [pre-expansion] vs 22.3% [postexpansion]; P < .001) and are more pronounced among ME states. Before expansion, only cancer type and education attainment were associated with the receipt of palliative treatment. Conversely, after expansion, race, insurance, location, cancer type, and ME status (odds ratio [OR], 1.23; 95% CI, 1.06-1.44; P = .018) were all associated with palliative care. Interestingly, the odds were higher if treatment involved receipt of pain management (OR, 2.05; 95% CI, 1.23-2.43; P = .006). Adjusted DID analysis confirmed increased rates of palliative treatment among patients living in ME states relative to non-ME states (DID, 4.4%; 95% CI, 1.2-7.7; P = .008); however, racial disparities persist (White, 5.6; 95% CI, 1.4-9.8; P = .009; minority, 2.6; 95% CI, -2.5 to 7.6; P = .333). CONCLUSION: The implementation of ME contributed to increased rates of palliative treatment for patients residing in ME states after expansion. However, racial disparities persist even after ME, resulting in inequitable access to palliative care.

Association of county-level food deserts and food swamps on postoperative outcomes among patients undergoing colorectal surgery.

BACKGROUND: Although malnutrition has been linked to worse healthcare outcomes, the broader context of food environments has not been examined relative to surgical outcomes. We sought to define the impact of food environment on postoperative outcomes of patients undergoing resection for colorectal cancer (CRC). METHODS: Patients who underwent surgery for CRC between 2014 and 2020 were identified from the Medicare database. Patient-level data were linked to the United States Department of Agriculture data on food environment. Multivariable regression was used to examine the association between food environment and the likelihood of achieving a textbook outcome (TO). TO was defined as the absence of an extended length of stay (≥75th percentile), postoperative complications, readmission, and mortality within 90 days. RESULTS: A total of 260,813 patients from 3017 counties were included in the study. Patients from unhealthy food environments were more likely to be Black, have a higher Charlson Comorbidity Index, and reside in areas with higher social vulnerability (all P < .01). Patients residing in unhealthy food environments were less likely to achieve a TO than that of patients residing in the healthiest food environments (food swamp: 48.8% vs 52.4%; food desert: 47.9% vs 53.7%; P < .05). On multivariable analysis, individuals residing in the unhealthy food environments had lower odds of achieving a TO than those of patients living in the healthiest food environments (food swamp: OR, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.83-0.90; food desert: OR, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.76-0.82); P < .05). CONCLUSION: The surrounding food environment of patients may serve as a modifiable sociodemographic risk factor that contributes to disparities in postoperative CRC outcomes.

The impact of county-level food access on the mortality and post-transplant survival among patients with steatotic liver disease.

BACKGROUND: The impact of county-level food access on mortality associated with steatotic liver disease, as well as post-liver transplant outcomes among individuals with steatotic liver disease, have not been characterized. METHODS: Data on steatotic liver disease-related mortality and outcomes of liver transplant recipients with steatotic liver disease between 2010 and 2020 were obtained from the Centers for Disease Control Prevention mortality as well as the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients databases. These data were linked to the food desert score, defined as the proportion of the total population in each county characterized as having both low income and limited access to grocery stores. RESULTS: Among 2,710 counties included in the analytic cohort, median steatotic liver disease-related mortality was 27.3 per 100,000 population (interquartile range 24.9-32.1). Of note, patients residing in counties with high steatotic liver disease death rates were more likely to have higher food desert scores (low: 5.0, interquartile range 3.1-7.8 vs moderate: 6.1, interquartile range, 3.8-9.3 vs high: 7.6, interquartile range 4.1-11.7). Among 28,710 patients who did undergo liver transplantation, 5,310 (18.4%) individuals lived in counties with a high food desert score. Liver transplant recipients who resided in counties with the worst food access were more likely to have a higher body mass index (>35 kg/m2: low food desert score, 17.3% vs highest food desert score, 20.1%). After transplantation, there was no difference in 2-year graft survival relative to county-level food access (food desert score: low: 88.4% vs high: 88.6%; P = .77). CONCLUSION: Poor food access was associated with a higher incidence rate of steatotic liver disease-related death, as well as lower utilization of liver transplants. On the other hand, among patients who did receive a liver transplant, there was no difference in 2-year graft survival regardless of food access strata. Policy initiatives should target the expansion of transplantation services to vulnerable communities in which there is a high mortality of steatotic liver disease.

Disparities in clinical trial enrollment among patients with gastrointestinal cancer relative to minority-serving and safety-netting hospitals.

BACKGROUND: For results to be generalizable to all patients with cancer, clinical trials need to include a diverse patient demographic that is representative of the general population. We sought to characterize the effect of receiving care at a minority-serving hospital (MSH) and/or safety-net hospital on clinical trial enrollment among patients with gastrointestinal (GI) malignancies. METHODS: Adult patients with GI cancer who underwent oncologic surgery and were enrolled in institutional-/National Cancer Institute-funded clinical trials between 2012 and 2019 were identified in the National Cancer Database. Multivariable regression was used to assess the relationship between MSH and safety-net status relative to clinical trial enrollment. RESULTS: Among 1,112,594 patients, 994,598 (89.4%) were treated at a non-MSH, whereas 117,996 (10.6%) were treated at an MSH. Only 1857 patients (0.2%) were enrolled in a clinical trial; most patients received care at a non-MSH (1794 [96.6%]). On multivariable analysis, the odds of enrollment in a clinical trial were markedly lower among patients treated at an MSH vs non-MSH (odds ratio [OR], 0.32; 95% CI, 0.22-0.46). In addition, even after controlling for receipt of care at MSH, Black patients remained at lower odds of enrollment in a clinical trial than White patients (OR, 0.57; 95% CI, 0.45-0.73; both P < .05). CONCLUSION: Overall, clinical trial participation among patients with GI cancer was extremely low. Patients treated at an MSH and high safety-net burden hospitals and Black individuals were much less likely to be enrolled in a clinical trial. Efforts should be made to improve trial enrollment and address disparities in trial representation.