FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W4295234634> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W4295234634 endingPage "S229" @default.
• W4295234634 startingPage "S229" @default.
• W4295234634 abstract "Objectives: The GOG-99 trial published in 2004 demonstrated that patients with high-intermediate risk endometrial cancer benefit from adjuvant external beam radiation therapy (EBRT) post-hysterectomy to decrease the risk of recurrence. The PORTEC-2 trial was then published in 2010, which was an open-label, non-inferiority randomized control trial that compared vaginal brachytherapy (VBT) to EBRT for patients with high-intermediate risk endometrial cancer. This trial demonstrated non-inferiority of VBT compared to EBRT with no significant difference in vaginal or locoregional recurrence, overall survival, and disease-free survival. However, it did show a significant decrease in grade 1-2 gastrointestinal toxicities in the VBT group. VBT is now the standard of care given its decreased toxicity but is also notably less time-consuming for patients. Our objective was to identify if there was a difference in the administration of VBT versus EBRT for endometrial cancer patients post-hysterectomy in rural versus urban locations. Methods: This is a retrospective cohort study based on the SEER 18 dataset of the US National Cancer Institute. Women with localized endometrial cancer post-hysterectomy were included in this study. The SEER dataset defines a localized tumor as a tumor confined to the organ of origin without extending beyond the primary organ. Data were collected from 2011 to 2018, given that PORTEC-2 was published in 2010. Urban versus rural population was defined by the rural-urban continuum codes. Women were excluded if they received both VBT and EBRT or if a rural-urban continuum code was not provided. Statistical analysis was completed with relative risk and confidence interval calculation. Results: In total, 10,840 women were included. There were 9813 women identified in metropolitan counties; 22% (n=2136) received EBRT post-hysterectomy for localized endometrial cancer, whereas 78% underwent VBT. There were 1027 women identified in nonmetropolitan counties, 22% (n=230) received EBRT and 78% (n=797) received VBT. When comparing metropolitan versus nonmetropolitan counties, there was no statistical difference between rates of EBRT versus VBT, with a relative risk of 1.16 (95% CI: 0.91-1.16, p=0.64). There were 125 women identified in completely rural counties, 21% (n=26) received EBRT and 79% (n=99) received VBT. There was no statistical difference in rates of radiation therapy between completely rural and metropolitan counties, with a relative risk of 0.95 (95% CI: 0.67-1.34, p=0.77). Conclusions: Living in a nonmetropolitan county or even a completely rural county was not associated with a difference in receiving EBRT versus VBT in patients with localized endometrial cancer status post-hysterectomy compared to rates in metropolitan counties. It could be inferred that even though rural counties may have fewer medical resources, patients are still receiving the standard of care in regard to radiation therapy for endometrial cancer. Objectives: The GOG-99 trial published in 2004 demonstrated that patients with high-intermediate risk endometrial cancer benefit from adjuvant external beam radiation therapy (EBRT) post-hysterectomy to decrease the risk of recurrence. The PORTEC-2 trial was then published in 2010, which was an open-label, non-inferiority randomized control trial that compared vaginal brachytherapy (VBT) to EBRT for patients with high-intermediate risk endometrial cancer. This trial demonstrated non-inferiority of VBT compared to EBRT with no significant difference in vaginal or locoregional recurrence, overall survival, and disease-free survival. However, it did show a significant decrease in grade 1-2 gastrointestinal toxicities in the VBT group. VBT is now the standard of care given its decreased toxicity but is also notably less time-consuming for patients. Our objective was to identify if there was a difference in the administration of VBT versus EBRT for endometrial cancer patients post-hysterectomy in rural versus urban locations. Methods: This is a retrospective cohort study based on the SEER 18 dataset of the US National Cancer Institute. Women with localized endometrial cancer post-hysterectomy were included in this study. The SEER dataset defines a localized tumor as a tumor confined to the organ of origin without extending beyond the primary organ. Data were collected from 2011 to 2018, given that PORTEC-2 was published in 2010. Urban versus rural population was defined by the rural-urban continuum codes. Women were excluded if they received both VBT and EBRT or if a rural-urban continuum code was not provided. Statistical analysis was completed with relative risk and confidence interval calculation. Results: In total, 10,840 women were included. There were 9813 women identified in metropolitan counties; 22% (n=2136) received EBRT post-hysterectomy for localized endometrial cancer, whereas 78% underwent VBT. There were 1027 women identified in nonmetropolitan counties, 22% (n=230) received EBRT and 78% (n=797) received VBT. When comparing metropolitan versus nonmetropolitan counties, there was no statistical difference between rates of EBRT versus VBT, with a relative risk of 1.16 (95% CI: 0.91-1.16, p=0.64). There were 125 women identified in completely rural counties, 21% (n=26) received EBRT and 79% (n=99) received VBT. There was no statistical difference in rates of radiation therapy between completely rural and metropolitan counties, with a relative risk of 0.95 (95% CI: 0.67-1.34, p=0.77). Conclusions: Living in a nonmetropolitan county or even a completely rural county was not associated with a difference in receiving EBRT versus VBT in patients with localized endometrial cancer status post-hysterectomy compared to rates in metropolitan counties. It could be inferred that even though rural counties may have fewer medical resources, patients are still receiving the standard of care in regard to radiation therapy for endometrial cancer." @default.
• W4295234634 created "2022-09-12" @default.
• W4295234634 creator A5016508834 @default.
• W4295234634 creator A5047155663 @default.
• W4295234634 creator A5058012640 @default.
• W4295234634 date "2022-08-01" @default.
• W4295234634 modified "2023-09-27" @default.
• W4295234634 title "Comparison of rates of vaginal brachytherapy vs. external beam radiation post-hysterectomy for endometrial cancer patients in rural vs. urban settings (459)" @default.
• W4295234634 doi "https://doi.org/10.1016/s0090-8258(22)01681-x" @default.
• W4295234634 hasPublicationYear "2022" @default.
• W4295234634 type Work @default.
• W4295234634 citedByCount "0" @default.
• W4295234634 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W4295234634 hasAuthorship W4295234634A5016508834 @default.
• W4295234634 hasAuthorship W4295234634A5047155663 @default.
• W4295234634 hasAuthorship W4295234634A5058012640 @default.
• W4295234634 hasConcept C121608353 @default.
• W4295234634 hasConcept C126322002 @default.
• W4295234634 hasConcept C126894567 @default.
• W4295234634 hasConcept C141071460 @default.
• W4295234634 hasConcept C167135981 @default.
• W4295234634 hasConcept C2775908122 @default.
• W4295234634 hasConcept C2777088508 @default.
• W4295234634 hasConcept C2777416452 @default.
• W4295234634 hasConcept C2778220009 @default.
• W4295234634 hasConcept C2778515176 @default.
• W4295234634 hasConcept C2778592230 @default.
• W4295234634 hasConcept C2779494336 @default.
• W4295234634 hasConcept C2908647359 @default.
• W4295234634 hasConcept C3020003399 @default.
• W4295234634 hasConcept C509974204 @default.
• W4295234634 hasConcept C71924100 @default.
• W4295234634 hasConcept C99454951 @default.
• W4295234634 hasConceptScore W4295234634C121608353 @default.
• W4295234634 hasConceptScore W4295234634C126322002 @default.
• W4295234634 hasConceptScore W4295234634C126894567 @default.
• W4295234634 hasConceptScore W4295234634C141071460 @default.
• W4295234634 hasConceptScore W4295234634C167135981 @default.
• W4295234634 hasConceptScore W4295234634C2775908122 @default.
• W4295234634 hasConceptScore W4295234634C2777088508 @default.
• W4295234634 hasConceptScore W4295234634C2777416452 @default.
• W4295234634 hasConceptScore W4295234634C2778220009 @default.
• W4295234634 hasConceptScore W4295234634C2778515176 @default.
• W4295234634 hasConceptScore W4295234634C2778592230 @default.
• W4295234634 hasConceptScore W4295234634C2779494336 @default.
• W4295234634 hasConceptScore W4295234634C2908647359 @default.
• W4295234634 hasConceptScore W4295234634C3020003399 @default.
• W4295234634 hasConceptScore W4295234634C509974204 @default.
• W4295234634 hasConceptScore W4295234634C71924100 @default.
• W4295234634 hasConceptScore W4295234634C99454951 @default.
• W4295234634 hasLocation W42952346341 @default.
• W4295234634 hasOpenAccess W4295234634 @default.
• W4295234634 hasPrimaryLocation W42952346341 @default.
• W4295234634 hasRelatedWork W1776247341 @default.
• W4295234634 hasRelatedWork W1994750039 @default.
• W4295234634 hasRelatedWork W2160243783 @default.
• W4295234634 hasRelatedWork W2515549752 @default.
• W4295234634 hasRelatedWork W3023151437 @default.
• W4295234634 hasRelatedWork W4200251356 @default.
• W4295234634 hasRelatedWork W4221135370 @default.
• W4295234634 hasRelatedWork W4237106564 @default.
• W4295234634 hasRelatedWork W4295234634 @default.
• W4295234634 hasRelatedWork W4310798218 @default.
• W4295234634 hasVolume "166" @default.
• W4295234634 isParatext "false" @default.
• W4295234634 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W4295234634 workType "article" @default.