Logo image
Back
Hospital Accreditation Status and Treatment Differences Among Black Patients With Colon Cancer
Journal article   Open access   Peer reviewed

Hospital Accreditation Status and Treatment Differences Among Black Patients With Colon Cancer

Kelley Chan, Bryan E. Palis, Joseph H. Cotler, Lauren M. Janczewski, Ronald J. Weigel, David J. Bentrem and Clifford Y. Ko
JAMA network open, Vol.7(8), e2429563
08/01/2024
DOI: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2024.29563
PMCID: PMC11339660
PMID: 39167405
url
https://doi.org/10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2024.29563View
Published (Version of record) Open Access

Abstract

This cohort study uses the National Program of Cancer Registries database to evaluate the association between Commission on Cancer accreditation status of hospitals and receipt of guideline-concordant care and risk of mortality among non-Hispanic Black patients with colon cancer. Importance Hospital-level factors, such as hospital type or volume, have been demonstrated to play a role in treatment disparities for Black patients with cancer. However, data evaluating the association of hospital accreditation status with differences in treatment among Black patients with cancer are lacking. Objective To evaluate the association of Commission on Cancer (CoC) hospital accreditation status with receipt of guideline-concordant care and mortality among non-Hispanic Black patients with colon cancer. Design, Setting, and Participants This population-based cohort study used the National Program of Cancer Registries, which is a multicenter database with data from all 50 states and the District of Columbia, and covers 97% of the cancer population in the US. The participants included non-Hispanic Black patients aged 18 years or older diagnosed with colon cancer between January 1, 2018, and December 31, 2020. Race and ethnicity were abstracted from medical records as recorded by health care facilities and practitioners. The data were analyzed from December 7, 2023, to January 17, 2024. Exposure CoC hospital accreditation. Main Outcome and Measures Guideline-concordant care was defined as adequate lymphadenectomy during surgery for patients with stages I to III disease or chemotherapy administration for patients with stage III disease. Multivariable logistic regression models investigated associations with receipt of guideline-concordant care and Cox proportional hazards regression models assessed associations with 3-year cancer-specific mortality. Results Of 17 249 non-Hispanic Black patients with colon cancer (mean [SD] age, 64.8 [12.8] years; 8724 females [50.6%]), 12 756 (74.0%; mean [SD] age, 64.7 [12.8] years) were treated at a CoC-accredited hospital and 4493 (26.0%; mean [SD] age, 65.1 [12.5] years) at a non–CoC-accredited hospital. Patients treated at CoC-accredited hospitals compared with those treated at non–CoC-accredited hospitals had higher odds of receiving guideline-concordant lymphadenectomy (adjusted odds ratio [AOR], 1.89; 95% CI, 1.69-2.11) and chemotherapy (AOR, 2.31; 95% CI, 1.97-2.72). Treatment at CoC-accredited hospitals was associated with lower cancer-specific mortality for patients with stages I to III disease who received surgery (adjusted hazard ratio [AHR], 0.87; 95% CI, 0.76-0.98) and for patients with stage III disease eligible for chemotherapy (AHR, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.59-0.96). Conclusions and Relevance In this cohort study of non-Hispanic Black patients with colon cancer, patients treated at CoC-accredited hospitals compared with those treated at non–CoC-accredited hospitals were more likely to receive guideline-concordant care and have lower mortality risk. These findings suggest that increasing access to high-quality guideline-concordant care at CoC-accredited hospitals may reduce variations in cancer treatment and outcomes for underserved populations.
 Oncology Online Only Original Investigation

Details

Metrics

5 Record Views
2 Times Cited - Web of Science
Logo image