Breast cancer survivorship and level of institutional involvement utilizing integrative oncology.

Abstract

e18588 Background: A growing body of evidence has shown that a Whole Person Integrative Oncology approach, adding the use of complementary and lifestyle therapies to cancer treatments, benefits patients by improving patient-reported outcomes and potentially extending overall survival. This study aims to investigate the relationship between the survival outcomes of breast cancer patients and the level of involvement in Integrative Oncology at the institutions treating those patients. Methods: Between January 2013 and December 2014, 4,815 breast cancer patients were available for survival analysis using an established claims-based method. These patients were filtered to include those with clear mapping to treating oncologists and treating institutions. To measure each institution’s level of Integrative involvement, a scoring system was developed with the Samueli Foundation and oncologists from each institution were surveyed on the education, availability, and financing of 12 complementary and lifestyle approaches during the treatment timeframe. Statistical analysis using multivariate modeling with logistic regression and a lasso approach were employed. 19 variables across region, patient demographics, and institutional profile were included. Model coefficients are exponentiated and presented as odds-ratios, with less than one having a negative impact on survival and greater than one improved survival. Results: We identified 173 patients mapping to 103 institutions and 103 oncologists who responded to our survey. Median age of breast cancer patients was 51 (range: 32-76). 14 of the patients (8%) were identified as metastatic. The 5-year overall survival among the Low scoring institutions was 89%, Low-Mid 96%, Mid-High 96%, High 95%. Chi square testing across these cohorts showed no statistically significant difference between them. On multivariate modeling, age, geography, metastatic status, academic setting, and Integrative score were predictors of 5-year survival. The most significant 9 variables are shown in Table. Having metastatic disease, treatment at a non NCCN designated facility, treatment at Midwest or Western Region predicts for lower 5-year survival. Older age, treatment at an academic setting, and having a High or Low-Mid Integrative score are predictors of improved survival. Conclusions: This study suggests that in addition to traditional predictors of survival such as metastatic disease and younger age, patients receiving treatment at an institution that supports Integrative Oncology programs may be associated with improved survival. More work is needed to evaluate the relationship between Integrative Oncology and cancer treatment outcomes.[Table: see text]