Background and Objectives
Conflicting evidence indicates that both race and geographic setting may influence the management of malignancies such as gastric adenocarcinoma (GAC).
Methods
We designed a retrospective cohort study utilizing data from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results program to identify patients with resectable GAC (N = 15 991). Exposures of interest were race and geographic region of diagnosis (West [WE], Midwest [MW], South [SO], or Northeast [NE]). Endpoints included: (1) recommendation against surgery and (2) gastric adenocarcinoma‐specific survival (GACSS). Multivariable logistic and Cox regression models were used to identify pertinent associations.
Results
A total of 15 991 patients were included (2007‐2015). In adjusted analysis, African American individuals more frequently received a recommendation against surgical resection than White (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] = 0.86; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.76‐0.98), Asian American (aOR = 0.55; 95% CI, 0.46‐0.65), and American Indian (aOR = 0.50; 95% CI, 0.31‐0.82) individuals. In addition to race‐based discrepancies, there was a significant association between geography and management: individuals diagnosed with GAC in the SO were more likely to receive a recommendation against surgery (odds ratio = 1.35; 95% CI, 1.23‐1.49) and exhibited poorer GACSS as compared with those in the WE, MW, or NE regions.
Conclusions
Race and geographic region of diagnosis affect treatment recommendations and GACSS among individuals with resectable tumors. African Americans with resectable cancers are more likely to receive a recommendation against surgery than individuals of other racial groups.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.