The Impact of Geographic Proximity to Transplant Center on Outcomes after Allogeneic Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Patients undergoing allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) need access to specialized care. We hypothesized that access to the transplant center after HSCT may be challenging for patients living in geographically distant areas, and that this would have an adverse effect on their outcome. We analyzed 1912 adult patients who underwent allogeneic HSCT at the Dana-Farber/Brigham and Women’s Cancer Center (DF/BWCC) between 1996 and 2009 and who resided within 6 hours driving time of the institution. Driving time from primary residence to DF/BWCC based on zipcode was determined using geographic information systems. The median driving time (range) to DF/BWCC was 72 (2-358) minutes. When patients were stratified by driving time quartile, overall survival (OS) after HSCT was similar in the first year but worse after 1 year in patients in the top quartile (≥160 minutes driving time). In a landmark analysis of the 909 patients alive and free of disease at 1 year, 5-year OS was 76% and 65% for patients in the first (≤40 minutes) and fourth (≥160 minutes) quartiles, respectively (P = .027). This was confirmed in a multivariable analysis. The difference appeared to be mostly because of an increase in nonrelapse mortality. The number of visits to the transplant center between day 100 and 365 after HSCT declined significantly with increasing driving time to the transplant center, which was independently associated with worse survival. Long driving time to the transplant center is associated with worse OS in patients alive and disease-free 1 year after HSCT, independently of other patient-, disease-, and HSCT-related variables. This may be in part related to the lower frequency of post-HSCT visits in patients living farther away. Patients undergoing allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) need access to specialized care. We hypothesized that access to the transplant center after HSCT may be challenging for patients living in geographically distant areas, and that this would have an adverse effect on their outcome. We analyzed 1912 adult patients who underwent allogeneic HSCT at the Dana-Farber/Brigham and Women’s Cancer Center (DF/BWCC) between 1996 and 2009 and who resided within 6 hours driving time of the institution. Driving time from primary residence to DF/BWCC based on zipcode was determined using geographic information systems. The median driving time (range) to DF/BWCC was 72 (2-358) minutes. When patients were stratified by driving time quartile, overall survival (OS) after HSCT was similar in the first year but worse after 1 year in patients in the top quartile (≥160 minutes driving time). In a landmark analysis of the 909 patients alive and free of disease at 1 year, 5-year OS was 76% and 65% for patients in the first (≤40 minutes) and fourth (≥160 minutes) quartiles, respectively (P = .027). This was confirmed in a multivariable analysis. The difference appeared to be mostly because of an increase in nonrelapse mortality. The number of visits to the transplant center between day 100 and 365 after HSCT declined significantly with increasing driving time to the transplant center, which was independently associated with worse survival. Long driving time to the transplant center is associated with worse OS in patients alive and disease-free 1 year after HSCT, independently of other patient-, disease-, and HSCT-related variables. This may be in part related to the lower frequency of post-HSCT visits in patients living farther away.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».