Search

Prior studies assessing colorectal cancer survival have reported better outcomes when operations are performed at high-volume centers. These studies have largely been cross-sectional, making it difficult to interpret their estimates. We aimed to assess the effect of facility volume on survival following proctectomy for rectal cancer.Using data from the National Cancer Database, we included all patients with complete baseline information who underwent proctectomy for non-metastatic rectal cancer between 2004 and 2016. Facility volume was defined as the number of rectal cancer cases managed at the treating center in the calendar year prior to the patient's surgery. Overall survival estimates were obtained for facility volumes ranging from 10 to 100 cases/year. Follow-up began on the day of surgery and continued until loss to follow-up or death.A total of 52,822 patients were eligible. Patients operated on at hospitals with volumes of 10, 30, and 50 cases/year had similar distributions of grade, clinical stage, and neoadjuvant therapies. 1-, 3-, and 5-year survival all improved with increasing facility volume. One-year survival was 94.0% (95% CI: 93.7, 94.3) for hospitals that performed 10 cases/year, 94.5% (95% CI: 94.2, 94.7) for 30 cases/year, and 94.8% (95% CI: 94.5, 95.0) for 50 cases/year. Five-year survival was 68.9% (95% CI: 68.0, 69.7) for hospitals that performed 10 cases/year, 70.8% (95% CI: 70.1, 71.5) for 30 cases/year, and 72.0% (95% CI: 71.2, 72.8) for 50 cases/year.Treatment at a higher volume facility results in improved survival following proctectomy for rectal cancer, though the small benefits are less profound than previously reported.

Racial disparities exist in patients with rectal cancer with respect to both treatment and survival. Minority-serving hospitals (MSHs) provide healthcare to a disproportionately large percent of minority patients in the USA. We examined the effects of rectal cancer treatment at MSH to understand drivers of these disparities.The NCDB was queried (2004-2015), and patients diagnosed with stage II or III rectal adenocarcinoma were identified. Racial case mix distribution was calculated at the institutional level, and MSHs were defined as those within the top decile of Black and Hispanic patients. Logistic regression was used to identify predictors of receipt of standard of care treatment. Survival was assessed using the Kaplan-Meier method, and Cox proportional hazards models were used to evaluate adjusted risk of death. Analyses were clustered by facility.A total of 68,842 patients met the inclusion criteria. Of these patients, 63,242 (91.9%) were treated at non-MSH, and 5600 (8.1%) were treated at MSH. In multivariable analysis, treatment at MSH (OR 0.70 95%CI 0.61-0.80 p 0.001) and Black race (OR 0.75 95%CI 0.70-0.81 p 0.001) were associated with significantly lower odds of receiving standard of care. In adjusted analysis, Black patients had a significantly higher risk of mortality (HR 1.20 95%CI 1.14-1.26 p 0.001).Treatment at MSH institutions and Black race were associated with significantly decreased odds of receipt of recommended standard therapy for locally advanced rectal adenocarcinoma. Survival was worse for Black patients compared to White patients despite adjustment for receipt of standard of care.