Patterns and predictors of referral among patients with muscle-invasive bladder cancer: A real-world study.

Abstract

e17051 Background: The multidisciplinary treatment of muscle-invasive bladder cancer (MIBC) has demonstrated considerable challenges in widespread clinical adoption. Despite guidelines recommending multidisciplinary, utilization of neoadjuvant chemotherapy for bladder cancer treatment remains low in the real-world settings. This study aims to examine the real-world referral patterns from urology to medical oncology and/or radiation oncology and the factors that associated with the referral following a diagnosis of MIBC. Methods: Following approval of involved IRBs, investigators followed a common protocol under the auspices of the Rapid Case Ascertainment at the Yale Cancer Center and performed manual chart review of MIBC patients diagnosed in the state of Connecticut from 2004 – 2015 and treated at investigator-affiliated hospitals. Information on medical history, radical or partial cystectomy, chemotherapy, radiation therapy, initial treating physician, and referrals to additional providers were recorded. This data set was linked to the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database for demographic information. Logistic regression analysis adjusted with demographics (i.e. gender, race) and medical histories (i.e. prior cancers) was conducted to identify factors associated with referral. Results: Of the 665 patients whose initial treating physician was urologist, only 291 (43.8%) were referred to a medical oncologist and/or a radiation oncologist. Independent factors associated with lack of referral included: older age (OR = 0.994 for every incremental year, P-value: 0.0055), and greater Charlson comorbidity score (OR = 1.064. P-value: 0.015). Patients with kidney diseases and diabetes were less likely to be referred. Conclusions: Lack of referral to medical oncology and/or radiation oncology is a critical barrier to the use of optimal multidisciplinary therapy. Referral decision made by urologists is impacted by a patient’s age and overall health condition. [Table: see text]